On 5/18/2026 at 1:42 PM, BrandonJT said:

So where does this say that the officer they are talking to is not an "authorized competent officer?"
It doesn't. Which means any immigration officer can be the one to make the decision

Were that true, then why can't a local IO approve an extension based on Thai family.
Any authorised competent officer would be under the direct supervision of the Commander, based at a regional office.

18 minutes ago, Liquorice said:

Were that true, then why can't a local IO approve an extension based on Thai family.
Any authorised competent officer would be under the direct supervision of the Commander, based at a regional office.

You quote 'where does this say' above that was a response to a 2 part answer:

The above is not true. The Police Order as referenced above does not give the IMM Officer FULL DISCRETION. And nowhere does it reference that directly or indirectly a large fee can be required for the Officer to exercise his/her 'full discretion'.

He answered the first "discretion" part but not the "large fee" part.

Edited May 31May 31 by JerryM

28 minutes ago, Liquorice said:

Were that true, then why can't a local IO approve an extension based on Thai family.
Any authorised competent officer would be under the direct supervision of the Commander, based at a regional office.

Because the plausible deniability routine only works on retirement extension.

3 minutes ago, JerryM said:

Because the plausible deniability routine only works on retirement extension.

That's the question, why? It's not the answer.
If a local IO is authorised by the Commander as a competent official to process a retirement extension without meeting the financial requirements, then why can't they duly process a marriage extension that fulfills the financial requirements.

3 minutes ago, Liquorice said:

That's the question, why? It's not the answer.
If a local IO is authorised by the Commander as a competent official to process a retirement extension without meeting the financial requirements, then why can't they duly process a marriage extension that fulfills the financial requirements.

Because the local office only gives an under consideration and not the final approval.

5 minutes ago, JerryM said:

Because the local office only gives an under consideration and not the final approval.

No, the local IO give the stamp, only after approval by the regional office because the local IO's are not authorised to approve them.
Yet, others would suggest the same local IO's have the authority as competent officials to approve extensions based on retirement that do not meet the financial requirements.

Of course, we know the real reasons why.

3 minutes ago, Liquorice said:

Of course, we know the real reasons why.

Under ORDER OF THE IMMIGRATION BUREAU No. 327/2557 section 5. the competent officer equivalent to or higher than inspector is of the opinion that the alien has legitimate reason

for staying in the Kingdom of Thailand ...

And persons on here and elsewhere maintain that "legitimate reason" is the same as any reason or no reason to waive any or all nominal requirements. OK.

BUT if you read the Immigration ORDER it says that extensions are granted under Paragraph 3, Section 35 of the Immigration Act and the Act takes precedence over any ministerial order.

And the fee under ANY extension granted under Sect 35 whether by the 32 cases in the Police Order or the Section 5. exception is 1900 bat (i.e. 2000 baht max).

Edited May 31May 31 by JerryM

Hey @JerryM , instead of arguing Thai Immigration law, of which you are no expert.

Tell us all why there are so many visa agents in Thailand, presumable make good coin

7 minutes ago, ozfarang said:

Hey @JerryM , instead of arguing Thai Immigration law, of which you are no expert.

Tell us all why there are so many visa agents in Thailand, presumable make good coin

Because the anti-Corruption Act section 128 (2018) or the Penal Code 143 against being a front to official corruption requires a complaint to be filed from an "injured party".

Edited May 31May 31 by JerryM

6 minutes ago, JerryM said:

Because the anti-Corruption Act section 128 (2018) or the Penal Code 143 against being a front to official corruption requires a complaint to be filed from an "injured party".

I've been in Thailand many years and haven't read/heard of any complaints being filed and multiple agents being put out of business.

So I guess the agents are keeping their customers happy

7 minutes ago, ozfarang said:

So I guess the agents are keeping their customers happy

yes -- also you cannot 'use' an agent for an extension and then AFTER file a complaint. But there is this:

The 110 IB officers were reported to have committed criminal conspiracy by setting up firms that process visa applications for foreigners, especially for Chinese nationals who travel to Thailand with a tourist visa but go on to get non-immigration visas without meeting the necessary business or volunteer criteria, he said.

https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2500386/100-cops-to-be-charged-over-illegal-visas.

But this was an exception because the complaint was filed by Chuwit who had first-hand info on the higher ups finances -- not an aggrieved party complaining about some malfeasance.

Edited May 31May 31 by JerryM

10 hours ago, JerryM said:

The bosses are taking their cut of what?

Why do we continue to tap dance around this subject? Agents who hold your hand for 4000 baht to smooth procedures at Imm -- and agents who hold out their hand for 30000 baht, to bend the rules -- are two entirely different kinds of agents.

For the second kind of agent, that 30000 baht fee is in large part to pay off the Imm mafia -- at all levels -- in order to circumvent financial requirements.

To ask "taking their cut of what" is a pretty naive question.

12 hours ago, JerryM said:

The bosses are taking their cut of what?

No victims means no crime. By refusing to aid criminal aliens, they prevent victims from being created. Is there any Western country with better enforcement with zero victims and a track record this clean? I’d love to know

On 5/19/2026 at 4:05 PM, BillyBobzTeeth said:

Thanks for all the replies and helpful info!

I've got enough to go on now, so you may close the thread if you choose to.

Post above from the OP.

And indeed thread has morphed into legality of agents as many do

Thread closed.