Visa amnesty 27th September

[Daithi85]

44 minutes ago, EricTh said:

Now I understand the odd date of 26th september, it's exactly six months since Thailand closed its border on 25 or 26th of March.

 

I doubt Thailand will extend it anymore, considering most home countries have opened their borders to their own citizens

Alot of people have not lived in there home country for years,why should they have to go back?id say that there will be an extension of some sort , probably a paid one .no other country has told People to leave, a few have threatened it but done a last minute U-turn.????????all will end well????

[treetops]

6 minutes ago, Daithi85 said:

Alot of people have not lived in there home country for years,why should they have to go back?

If they've failed to correctly legitimise their stay elsewhere then they've only themself to blame.

[The33]

9 hours ago, Letseng said:

Are IOs in your country more friendly & more helpful?  

They are more helpful for sure, and at least they have play by how the laws are written/meant, and arent free to interpret things the way they want to... But the laws considering immigration/tourism are more strict for people outside the EU, but more understanding during this world crises.. A while back, cant remember who it was that was saying it, if it was the PM(?),  "no other country has been this kind to foreigners" considering the amnesty, well, many countries are still letting Thais stay, even tho their 90/180 days rule shouldnt allow them to.. This is a world crises, things should be on a case-to-case basis, like they said they would, and they do have the option to do that still, as they extended the emergency decree.. I have never "bought" a ED-visa or similar visas, always played by the books considering my visas staying in Thailand, visiting gf on tourist visa, never had any issues.. Now after becoming a father to a Thai-citizen it turns difficult, it should have been the other way around, the world is dealing with a pandemic, again, it should be the other way around.. They want foreigners to come, spend their money in Thailand again, well, Im here spending my money from abroad already, healthy, again, it should be easier, not more difficult...

[EricTh]

14 minutes ago, Daithi85 said:

Alot of people have not lived in there home country for years,why should they have to go back?id say that there will be an extension of some sort , probably a paid one .no other country has told People to leave, a few have threatened it but done a last minute U-turn.????????all will end well????

A lot of people haven't had a pandemic for decades. So it's time to go back to your home country and become a citizen there unless you wanna give up your citizenship there.

 

This isn't normal times that we are living right now.

Edited August 26, 2020 by EricTh

[EricTh]

44 minutes ago, JoseThailand said:

There are still no flights to many destinations. Flights keep being cancelled all the time.

Really? Tell me which home country you're from and I will find flights for you from Thailand.

[Tanoshi]

19 minutes ago, Daithi85 said:

Alot of people have not lived in there home country for years,why should they have to go back?

Nobody is forcing you back to your home Country if you have a legitimate right to stay.

Only those classed as short term 'visitors' are being asked to leave.

[The33]

1 hour ago, Bangkok Barry said:

You took my comment too seriously. When you have made so few posts - a taker rather than a contributor to the site - it is easy to assume you are very new here. If you were new as your very small number of posts suggested, then letting you know how things work might have been useful to you, an eye-opener. How was I to know you just use the site without contributing anything? I don't see how trying to inform an apparent newbie is 'insulting', do you? Lighten up - and contribute more.

I dont have those connections, nor the knowledge about Thai visas to contribute with much on here.. Of course, I could like now, contribute with posting a whole lot that doest help anyone, just even more to read through to find the information people are looking for..? Like your posts now.. If you call that a contribution? Then we clearly look different at what is contributing, and whats not.. I registered another user on here like 10 years ago, but lost access to that email-account, couldnt remember the log in..

Well, Im frustrated right now, I will lighten up when I find a solution to my situation, which apparently isnt a situation to start with, just IOs that seem to misinterpret the rules on purpose to "make a problem".. 

Usually I rather enjoy staying here, than be sitting on the internet complaining or discussing.. But I do read news and so on, on here, they do get their "clicks" more or less daily.. And I dont feel bad about being a "taker", if thats what you went for there.. This is why this website was started, I assume, and I have been very thankful for all relevant advice and thoughts so far, expecting more responses like yours, happy to see that there hasnt been ????

Edited August 26, 2020 by The33

[sandyf]

40 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Nobody is forcing you back to your home Country if you have a legitimate right to stay.

Only those classed as short term 'visitors' are being asked to leave.

Exactly. Those that opted to use a ME non O knew at the time that they could only stay in Thailand for 90 days, as I did when I went to HCMC last Nov. We all did on the assumption that there would never be a problem at the border, but every assumption carries a risk, something that now has to be dealt with one way or another. At the end of the day who was it that lost the bet.

[The33]

1 hour ago, Tanoshi said:

Whilst I sympathise with your plight, from Thailand's point of view you arrived as a visitor on a Tourist Visa.

Your not married, your not the legalised Father of your daughter, so you don't qualify to apply for a 1 year extension based on Thai family.

I did ask for your nationality and age, which you've ignored to answer and I only asked that to see if perhaps you could qualify for a 1 year extension based on retirement .... albeit through an agent.

I dont see how that is relevant, if I would be old enough to qualify for a retirement visa, I wouldve brought that up, Im in my 30s, with a nordic passport..

Im not married, no.. I am however the legalised father of my daughter, my name is on the birth certificate and so on... So I do qualify for a non o, but I cant apply for a Non O because of what I wrote in my first post, explaining why, that 1 day overstay that the IO convinced me to do, to come back the day after bringing my daughter with me instead, have the 60 day extension instead of the emergency visa that I had all the paperwork and everything set up for, and being there on the day of expiration date in the first place... It was also mentioned that Im on a 60-day visa extension to visit my daughter now (so I dont know where you read that Im not the legalized father?), expired end of May, which has been extended by the cabinet, for now.. So not on overstay now, and according to UbonJoe and a few others, the IOs are misinterpreting the rule... So I should be allowed to apply for a non o, but they wont let me because of that "made up" reason...

They know standing there with my daughter which is 8 months in my arms, I will pay the fee that an agent demands to not leave, like another on here mentioned, they now got leverage.. 

[Jack Hna]

1 hour ago, The33 said:

I dont see how that is relevant, if I would be old enough to qualify for a retirement visa, I wouldve brought that up, Im in my 30s, with a nordic passport..

Im not married, no.. I am however the legalised father of my daughter, my name is on the birth certificate and so on... So I do qualify for a non o, but I cant apply for a Non O because of what I wrote in my first post, explaining why, that 1 day overstay that the IO convinced me to do, to come back the day after bringing my daughter with me instead, have the 60 day extension instead of the emergency visa that I had all the paperwork and everything set up for, and being there on the day of expiration date in the first place... It was also mentioned that Im on a 60-day visa extension to visit my daughter now (so I dont know where you read that Im not the legalized father?), expired end of May, which has been extended by the cabinet, for now.. So not on overstay now, and according to UbonJoe and a few others, the IOs are misinterpreting the rule... So I should be allowed to apply for a non o, but they wont let me because of that "made up" reason...

They know standing there with my daughter which is 8 months in my arms, I will pay the fee that an agent demands to not leave, like another on here mentioned, they now got leverage.. 

Recent visit to my local office resulted in similar frustration. I was even told I can only get a non O by being married and no such visa was available as a father. Rather than argue with the head IO I just explained I need to stay I even asked her to refer an agent and she said they will not help in my situation. She did volunteer one bit of info though. Got the impression she was trying her best. She said a medical certificate could get you 30 days. So some kind  of letter from your embassy plus a medical examiners declaration.

 

She had no reason to mention that.

 

 

 

 

[The33]

32 minutes ago, Jack Hna said:

Recent visit to my local office resulted in similar frustration. I was even told I can only get a non O by being married and no such visa was available as a father. Rather than argue with the head IO I just explained I need to stay I even asked her to refer an agent and she said they will not help in my situation. She did volunteer one bit of info though. Got the impression she was trying her best. She said a medical certificate could get you 30 days. So some kind  of letter from your embassy plus a medical examiners declaration.

 

She had no reason to mention that.

 

 

 

 

Yea, apparently you do have some "health options", just have to figure out a bit more what kind of stuff that relates to..? Me myself, I had a surgery here in Thailand last year, which is an infection that still bothers me these days, so I might check into that, thanks ????

I was told by the officers that I spoke to, that I was eligible to apply for a non o, if it wasnt just for that 1 day on the previous visa, so apparently they dont agree with each other on that part, neither.. ????  

Edited August 26, 2020 by The33

[Tanoshi]

1 hour ago, The33 said:

Im not married, no.. I am however the legalised father of my daughter, my name is on the birth certificate and so on... So I do qualify for a non o,

Firstly, I am not trying to be contemptuous, or mocking your situation, just giving you an insight for any future plans you may have to stay long term in Thailand.

 

To apply for an annual extension of stay, you must initially have a Non O Visa

Applying for the Non O at Immigration from a VE, or TV entry is a prelude to obtain the 1 year extension.

You must be 50 years of age to apply on the basis of retirement - you obviously don't qualify.

You must be legal married to a Thai national to apply on the basis of marriage - again you don't qualify.

You must be the legalised Father of a child born to a Thai citizen to apply based on Thai child - unfortunately being named on the child's birth certificate does not make you the legalised Father.

 

Under Thai law if the child was born out of wedlock, it is clear who the Mother is, but not so the Father, unless you later marry. If the woman is married the law assumes the husband is the Father. If the woman is not married the law makes no such assumptions about the Father. As it stands you have no parental rights or legal obligations to that child.

Immigration would therefore not accept your application based on Thai child with the only proof being named on the Childs birth certificate. You would require a Court Order to legalise you as the Childs biological Father.

Please read this link to understand your position under Thai law.

 

 

When a baby is born, it is clear who the mother is. Who the father is remains the question. If the mother is married the the law will assume that the husband is the father of the child. It doesn't matter who makes the registration.
However, if the mother is not married, the law makes no such assumption and the father being named on the the birth certificate is not enough. After all,anyone can be named on the birth certificate as the father, without that person knowing let alone agreeing. In that case the father has to legitimize the child, with which he acknowledge before the law that he is the father of the child.

 

 

Unfortunately, I therefore don't see any way forward for you to remain in Thailand beyond Sept 26th.

You mentioned planning to take your daughter and wife back to your home Country and your remaining time may be better spent on getting your daughter a (Nordic) Passport and researching how to apply for a Visa for your g/f.

 

This is probably not the answer you were looking for, but unfortunately this is your current situation.

[Jack Hna]

17 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Firstly, I am not trying to be contemptuous, or mocking your situation, just giving you an insight for any future plans you may have to stay long term in Thailand.

 

To apply for an annual extension of stay, you must initially have a Non O Visa

Applying for the Non O at Immigration from a VE, or TV entry is a prelude to obtain the 1 year extension.

You must be 50 years of age to apply on the basis of retirement - you obviously don't qualify.

You must be legal married to a Thai national to apply on the basis of marriage - again you don't qualify.

You must be the legalised Father of a child born to a Thai citizen to apply based on Thai child - unfortunately being named on the child's birth certificate does not make you the legalised Father.

 

Under Thai law if the child was born out of wedlock, it is clear who the Mother is, but not so the Father, unless you later marry. If the woman is married the law assumes the husband is the Father. If the woman is not married the law makes no such assumptions about the Father. As it stands you have no parental rights or legal obligations to that child.

Immigration would therefore not accept your application based on Thai child with the only proof being named on the Childs birth certificate. You would require a Court Order to legalise you as the Childs biological Father.

Please read this link to understand your position under Thai law.

 

 

When a baby is born, it is clear who the mother is. Who the father is remains the question. If the mother is married the the law will assume that the husband is the father of the child. It doesn't matter who makes the registration.
However, if the mother is not married, the law makes no such assumption and the father being named on the the birth certificate is not enough. After all,anyone can be named on the birth certificate as the father, without that person knowing let alone agreeing. In that case the father has to legitimize the child, with which he acknowledge before the law that he is the father of the child.

 

 

Unfortunately, I therefore don't see any way forward for you to remain in Thailand beyond Sept 26th.

You mentioned planning to take your daughter and wife back to your home Country and your remaining time may be better spent on getting your daughter a (Nordic) Passport and researching how to apply for a Visa for your g/f.

 

This is probably not the answer you were looking for, but unfortunately this is your current situation.

There will be a concession. It's just going to be painful waiting for it.

 

All because you have to be 50 to park 20k in an account. Such an antiquated ruling. Should be able to do regardless of age but I digress.

 

 

[The33]

8 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Firstly, I am not trying to be contemptuous, or mocking your situation, just giving you an insight for any future plans you may have to stay long term in Thailand.

 

To apply for an annual extension of stay, you must initially have a Non O Visa

Applying for the Non O at Immigration from a VE, or TV entry is a prelude to obtain the 1 year extension.

You must be 50 years of age to apply on the basis of retirement - you obviously don't qualify.

You must be legal married to a Thai national to apply on the basis of marriage - again you don't qualify.

You must be the legalised Father of a child born to a Thai citizen to apply based on Thai child - unfortunately being named on the child's birth certificate does not make you the legalised Father.

 

Under Thai law if the child was born out of wedlock, it is clear who the Mother is, but not so the Father, unless you later marry. If the woman is married the law assumes the husband is the Father. If the woman is not married the law makes no such assumptions about the Father. As it stands you have no parental rights or legal obligations to that child.

Immigration would therefore not accept your application based on Thai child with the only proof being named on the Childs birth certificate. You would require a Court Order to legalise you as the Childs biological Father.

Please read this link to understand your position under Thai law.

 

 

When a baby is born, it is clear who the mother is. Who the father is remains the question. If the mother is married the the law will assume that the husband is the father of the child. It doesn't matter who makes the registration.
However, if the mother is not married, the law makes no such assumption and the father being named on the the birth certificate is not enough. After all,anyone can be named on the birth certificate as the father, without that person knowing let alone agreeing. In that case the father has to legitimize the child, with which he acknowledge before the law that he is the father of the child.

 

 

Unfortunately, I therefore don't see any way forward for you to remain in Thailand beyond Sept 26th.

You mentioned planning to take your daughter and wife back to your home Country and your remaining time may be better spent on getting your daughter a (Nordic) Passport and researching how to apply for a Visa for your g/f.

 

This is probably not the answer you were looking for, but unfortunately this is your current situation.

You clearly know more than me, this is why I ask for help on here, because the information given around by immigration and so on is so various... And sometimes difficult to completely understand everything.. I have always dealt with my visas myself, never had any issues, before becoming a father, all the sudden now, everything turns difficult, it should be the other way around..  As I have friends that have babies themselves have gotten their non o without that process, there must be a reason around it, and the officers at the immigration said I would be eligible to apply, ig it wasnt for that one day.. I dont know, all I know is that I have to find a solution on this in time do get it in order before the 26th. next month, and there is always a way in Thailand, I just like to do things by myself, knowing there isnt anything that might come back to me, bite my ass later.. Never gone for the ED-solution or easy ways out as "everyone" are talking about, rather been honest about not having any other reason than visiting gf, being a tourist earlier..  Been going back home every now and then for a few months, and staying here for some longer periods at the time.. Going back right now, the way things are, well, not if I can find a way of staying, for now.. The plan was to bring them home to meet my side of the family when she was 4-5 months (when the doctors would say it was ok), , then back here to apply for a non o later on, was the plan.. As to getting married to legalize the father-situation, that is something that is kinda in the cards for the near future anyways, but I have to go home to get the paper that states Im not already married, as our embassies doesnt provide that, the tax-department does unfortunately... But I appreciate your input, but this didnt seem to be an issue, maybe as we have been registered on this address and on the lease of this house together for about 3 years now, and my daughter is only 8 months old ..? No idea, but that didnt seem to be an issue.. But who knows, it might have been, if it isnt one thing, its another..? Right..? ???? 

[Phillip9]

9 hours ago, 321 BOOM said:

I would be very suspicious of an Agent who would say you have to go to IMO personally, because this would mean he is no doing his job.

Even if you use an agent you are still required to go to immigration personally.  Usually you will go with your agent through a VIP entrance and you don’t have to wait.  If an agent does not require you to go, I would be concerned that something illegitimate is going on.
 

In my case, when I got my student visa I had to go to immigration with a representative from my school.  The process only took a few minutes but I still had to be there personally.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Phillip9

[finy]

7 hours ago, Daithi85 said:

Alot of people have not lived in there home country for years,why should they have to go back?id say that there will be an extension of some sort , probably a paid one .no other country has told People to leave, a few have threatened it but done a last minute U-turn.????????all will end well????

There will be an extenstion to the amnesty.

 

After what the PM said today he obviously thinks the exact opposite of immigration.

[JoseThailand]

7 hours ago, EricTh said:

Really? Tell me which home country you're from and I will find flights for you from Thailand.

They sell tickets, but then cancel flights and give you a voucher.

[JoseThailand]

46 minutes ago, finy said:

After what the PM said today he obviously thinks the exact opposite of immigration.

What did he say?

[lovesthespicy]

49 minutes ago, finy said:

There will be an extenstion to the amnesty.

 

After what the PM said today he obviously thinks the exact opposite of immigration.

What did the PM say today? All I see is the usual we need to open up to some groups of tourist AKA The Chinese. 

 

[Phillip9]

39 minutes ago, lovesthespicy said:

What did the PM say today? All I see is the usual we need to open up to some groups of tourist AKA The Chinese. 

I think that is the story he is referring to.  Just that the PM supports allowing limited tourist entry.  Probably only Chinese.  Probably only to Phuket.

 

If they do start allowing new tourists in, I think it makes it even less likely amnesty will be extended.

[321 BOOM]

1 hour ago, Phillip9 said:

Even if you use an agent you are still required to go to immigration personally.  Usually you will go with your agent through a VIP entrance and you don’t have to wait.  If an agent does not require you to go, I would be concerned that something illegitimate is going on.
 

In my case, when I got my student visa I had to go to immigration with a representative from my school.  The process only took a few minutes but I still had to be there personally.

Again, you are NOT, my mother in law 2 years ago made a retirement Visa and NOT went to IMO, I did an ED 6 years ago and NOT went to IMO, my wife has done several kind of Visas here, ED, dependent and NOT went one time to immigration... for this you are paying the fee.

[321 BOOM]

8 hours ago, EricTh said:

A lot of people haven't had a pandemic for decades. So it's time to go back to your home country and become a citizen there unless you wanna give up your citizenship there.

 

This isn't normal times that we are living right now.

Good idea.. would like to change mine for a Russian citizenship if possible

[Mike Teavee]

18 minutes ago, 321 BOOM said:

Again, you are NOT, my mother in law 2 years ago made a retirement Visa and NOT went to IMO, I did an ED 6 years ago and NOT went to IMO, my wife has done several kind of Visas here, ED, dependent and NOT went one time to immigration... for this you are paying the fee.

Things have changed over the past couple of years (e.g. for retirement visas there's now no Income certificates for AU, UK, US, so you have to show > 65,000 income coming from overseas in every month or keep 800K in the Bank for 5 months & 400K for the remainder of the year) and they have gotten a lot tighter on the process so everybody that I know, from getting their Visa 100% within the rules to not being able to meet the financial or insurance requirements has had to go into the Immigration office to have their photo taken (sometimes whilst holding the declaration about penalties for overstay). 

 

@CorpusChristiereports that he had his photo taken at the bank (Not sure he mentioned what kind of Visa, I'm assuming ED or Volunteer) rather than at the immigration office, obviously this sounds shady but it would be even more shady if there were no photos at all. 

 

CC: Did they have you hold up any kind of form while having your photo taken?

[david555]

20 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

Things have changed over the past couple of years (e.g. for retirement visas there's now no Income certificates for AU, UK, US, so you have to show > 65,000 income coming from overseas in every month or keep 800K in the Bank for 5 months & 400K for the remainder of the year) and they have gotten a lot tighter on the process so everybody that I know, from getting their Visa 100% within the rules to not being able to meet the financial or insurance requirements has had to go into the Immigration office to have their photo taken (sometimes whilst holding the declaration about penalties for overstay). 

 

@CorpusChristiereports that he had his photo taken at the bank (Not sure he mentioned what kind of Visa, I'm assuming ED or Volunteer) rather than at the immigration office, obviously this sounds shady but it would be even more shady if there were no photos at all. 

 

CC: Did they have you hold up any kind of form while having your photo taken?

Ret.ext. change ...?

Yes... it became faster and faster yesterday not more than 15 minutes !!

On condition you meet the full requirments ????

 

 

[Mike Teavee]

8 minutes ago, david555 said:

Ret.ext. change ...?

Yes... it became faster and faster yesterday not more than 15 minutes !!

On condition you meet the full requirments ????

 

 

Yes, the requirements changed for everybody from AU, UK & US who can no longer get income certificates and anybody else who uses the 800K in the bank method (which I do) who now need to have 800K for 2 months before & 3 months after their extension then keep 400K in the bank for the remaining 7 months.

 

I did my extension on Wednesday & was in & out of CW in 30 minutes (including getting the Bank Letter) 

 

Edited August 27, 2020 by Mike Teavee

[JackThompson]

18 hours ago, vinny41 said:

If you were a Thai and you applied for a visa to visit a country in the West and your visa application was rejected or if was accepted but only after you went through major hurdles. wouldn't you want your Goverment to apply the same rules for entry into Thailand

To deal with injustices inflicted, publicize these events, and encourage others around the world not to visit said-country.

I would (and do) want my country's immigration policies to be what helps my own people the most.  That would be allowing non-criminal foreigners with their own money/income to spend to spend it providing incomes for my fellow citizens.   

 

Simultanesously, I would want immigration to stop ALL foreign-workers who are displacing Thai workers - forcing them to go overseas to do the same jobs that foreigners are doing in their own homeland.  It is easy to see what labor-fields are negatively-impacted, by examining the pay-rates. 

 

And, of course, I would not want a policy of forcing foreign family-members - often sole-providers for my fellow citizens families - to be extorted for "permission" to continue providing that family's income.

 

I would also want student-visa holders to actually be students - and volunteers to actually be doing volunteer work.  But over the years, watching the so-called 'crackdowns' occur, it is clear the only "changes" were to increase the payoff-amounts to immigration - not to end the ongoing bad-practices.

[JackThompson]

12 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

I don't "Need" an agent, I use one as they make things as easy as possible for me (including completing all the paperwork & driving me to CW).

 

My point was that not all Agents are dodgy & unscrupulous, some just provide a legitimate (& IMHO valuable) service so shouldn't be tarred with the same brush.

You have the financials met, but you skip the queue, and your application does not get the fine-tooth-comb and "new invented rule" scrutiny, which others may receive. 

 

The only difference in your agent-service is, if something went sideways later, you could indpendently-prove you "really qualified" for your extension.

[JackThompson]

11 hours ago, EricTh said:

... We are not talking about non-citizens doing a visa-run to another country in which he is not a citizen. Those aren't tourists but visa-runners abusing the system.

"Abusing" = "Using the bribe-free MFA, to obtain Visas for which they qualify, instead of lining IO-pockets with agent-laundered brown-enveolope money."

[CorpusChristie]

1 hour ago, Mike Teavee said:

Things have changed over the past couple of years (e.g. for retirement visas there's now no Income certificates for AU, UK, US, so you have to show > 65,000 income coming from overseas in every month or keep 800K in the Bank for 5 months & 400K for the remainder of the year) and they have gotten a lot tighter on the process so everybody that I know, from getting their Visa 100% within the rules to not being able to meet the financial or insurance requirements has had to go into the Immigration office to have their photo taken (sometimes whilst holding the declaration about penalties for overstay). 

 

@CorpusChristiereports that he had his photo taken at the bank (Not sure he mentioned what kind of Visa, I'm assuming ED or Volunteer) rather than at the immigration office, obviously this sounds shady but it would be even more shady if there were no photos at all. 

 

CC: Did they have you hold up any kind of form while having your photo taken?

No, just when the 800K cash was being counted out , my agent asked to take my photo against a white wall and I asked what the photo was for and was told

Edited August 27, 2020 by CorpusChristie

[Mike Teavee]

3 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

You have the financials met, but you skip the queue, and your application does not get the fine-tooth-comb and "new invented rule" scrutiny, which others may receive. 

 

The only difference in your agent-service is, if something went sideways later, you could indpendently-prove you "really qualified" for your extension.

I don't believe I did skip the queue as last year I had to wait about 45 minutes from getting the queue ticket to getting in front of the officer who does the document check, this year I'm assuming the agent made an appointment as I only had to wait 5-10 mins & we walked past the queue ticket desk.

 

As I've mentioned before, the agent I use only deals with people are are "really qualified" for the extension & will send you away if you're not, so I have no concerns about anything going side-ways later, maybe the document check isn't as thorough as an individual but they do go through everything (last year one of the forms had changed so the officer checking the document gave me another one to sign & replaced it, maybe  they wouldn't have been so helpful if the agent wasn't with me).  

 

What I definitely don't get is any requests for information/evidence that's not legally required and this is where the real benefit of using an agent is even if you meet all of the requirements as not only do they know all of the rules, they deal with immigration on a daily basis so are much less likely to be fobbed off with something that isn't a legal requirement.