After so many delays the Co. lawyer finally took my passport in today to apply for my W/P.

I have had the 2 month extension already 2 weeks ago leaving me with about 6 weeks left. However when my W/P was applied for today the lawyer was told that it was not possible because I have to have the full 3 month initial non-o visa instead of the 2 month extension, and that I have to get a new visa again

My wife has since called the work permit people and they told her that there should be no problem.

The lawyer claims that he was told that this law was changed after a 'meeting' on the 17th of this month. Immigration also informed us that I only need need a minimum of 1 month remaining on the extension when I was at Suan Plu.

Has anybody heard of this? Or is the lawyer talking out of his A-Hole?

Thanks in advance.

The problem appears to be that you are on a 60 day extension to visit your wife. Did you start out with a non-o visa? You may have to make a visa run to get a new non-o visa.

As far as I am aware no law has been changed recently.

I think what immigration told you was in reference to the amont of time left on visa to apply for a one year extension.

Edited October 29, 200817 yr by ubonjoe

I started out with the Non-O visa yes, and got the 60-day extension on the 13th.

The odd thing is as well that Suan Plu even gave me the option of an additional extension once I produce my W/P so that I have enough time to produce tax receipts for my 1yr extension of stay, so that I won't have to go on a visa run again.

Why would they do that if I couldn't get a W/P in the first place?

My wife is headed down to the department of labour tomorrow (Hopefully), with my passport to get an answer on this.

I started out with the Non-O visa yes, and got the 60-day extension on the 13th.

The odd thing is as well that Suan Plu even gave me the option of an additional extension once I produce my W/P so that I have enough time to produce tax receipts for my 1yr extension of stay, so that I won't have to go on a visa run again.

Why would they do that if I couldn't get a W/P in the first place?

My wife is headed down to the department of labour tomorrow (Hopefully), with my passport to get an answer on this.

I beginning to suspect the lawyer is giving you a run around. And/or he just doesn't know what to do.

Your wife may be able to get things sorted out with the labour department.

I think what immigration told you is true. They can give you another extension according to the police order just that it can't be for more than 60 days.

Good luck and let us know how it worked out.

Joe

Edited October 29, 200817 yr by ubonjoe

The more that I think about it, the more I think that the Lawyer did not stress that my Non-O visa is based upon my marriage to a Thai. This question was put to my misses (What type of Non-O) when she called the labour department and so could well be significant.

Quiet likely a face losing exercise for the Lawyer but I ain't going on no bloody visa run if I can help it.

You're not required to have a lawyer to get a workpermit. You + wife sound quite capable of figuring out things yourself, so why not just loose the lawyer? In the context of visa extensions and work permits, lawyers are only useful if they save you legwork.

A quick update.

It has just been confirmed that this is down to a slight problem with my extension stamp which does not state that I have the extension based on marriage to a Thai.

The solution is to simply go back to Suan Plu with passport and marriage documentation in hand, and have the stamp amended accordingly.

Sill a pain in the ar$e but much better than some stupid visa run.