I just wonder the reference to 'original application" could, in fact, mean the first extension of stay application rather than original non-O or non-OA visas used to enter Thailand. In the case of retirees, for instance, it's always been my understanding that these visas are issued on the grounds of being aged 50+ rather than specifically for retirement. So how would the powers-that-be be able to go back further than the original extension application in determining consistency on the Reason issue?
Create an account or sign in to comment