I am led to believe that the immigration officer has a level of discretion for the issuance of extensions of stay ?

I wonder if anyone has known anyone who has got an extension without quite meeting the criteria ?

I ask because my pension is B35000 per month, so a little under the required amount for extension based on a Thai child, but just wondering if it may be worth applying anyway ?

Thanks

You can an apply but don't hold your breath.

I thought as much :-(

You would have to use the 400k in bank for two months (if first application).

the way I understand it, applications for extensions of stay other than based on retirement have to be reviewed and approved by an office a step above the local immigration office (vide: the 30 day 'under consideration' period)...so, there is a constraint on the personal discretion that the local officer can exercise...

financial requirements are usually strictly enforced...

How about 35k pension and 50k in the bank? Would that be a workaround?

apetly- the only visa that allows income and bank balance is the O-A :-(

apetly- the only visa that allows income and bank balance is the O-A :-(

Extensions of O visas (don't need to be O-A) based on retirement allow a combo of income and Thai banked money (800 K total).

How about 35k pension and 50k in the bank? Would that be a workaround?

No. Only Extensions of Stay for Retirement allow a combination.

Strange, I was just talking about the level of discretion individual immigration officers have with some foreigners over lunch today.

I recently had an acquaintance (by no means a friend that's for sure ) denied a retirement extension because his pension money fell below the required minimum (due to the strong baht). It was a shortfall of only about 3000 baht a month. I urged him to put money in his thai bank account to make up the difference utilizing the “and/or” clause in O visa extension rules. He’s lived here 5+ years and “knew better than I did”, so he decided not to it.

Mostly for that reason, I also decided NOT to accompany him to Changwattana. I don't like to fool around with 'iffy' things out there as it’s usually a waste of time and certainly a waste of connections/contacts trying to push something thru that is clearly on the wrong side of the rules.

No big surprise he was denied, and has subsequently switched to another visa (which one; dunno, don't care ). Of course, later on, listening to him tell the story to his other 'in-the-know' (yet equally clueless) friends; it’s turned into a great conspiracy by the thais to deny him the 'right' to live here, and not because he didn’t meet the criteria to garner an extension.

Individual Immigration officers do have latitude to do discretionary things, but in my experience they stick pretty close to the posted rules. As another poster pointed out, if you get the 30 day 'under consideration stamp' where your supporting documents are reviewed by a person higher up the proverbial food chain; ANY latitude in interpretation is unlikely to be forthcoming.

Good Luck

The level for support of a child is 400k as note above but when asked, Pattaya asked for 500k. When the rules were put to them, they still wanted 500k. I personally think some clown has thought out 12*40 and come to 480 and thinks that it should be the same as the monthly amount, accrued for a year.

500k is the figure required in the case of a family member of foreigners who has been permitted to stay temporarily in Thailand for study in an educational institution, as detailed under Section 2.11 of Police Order 777/2551.

As both involve children that was probably the misunderstanding - if you want to live here with a child in school (non Thai) the amount would be 500k for one parent. If to support a Thai child and you are the parent (may require proof of custody) the amount would be 400k.