Being denied entry with marriage visa

[NoshowJones]

13 minutes ago, tonray said:

You overstate the importance of expats to the Thai economy, it is a benefit but hardly what keeps the country economically stable. 

Also think of all the empty hotel rooms all over Thailand even in the so called high season, mainly because of Thailands attitude to tourists, because they are supposed to be anxious that no one gets the chance to work illegally, yet they will not put the emphasis on the employers or the illegal workers themselves, they are just too lazy to get off their backsides and raid the factories and schools, and dare I say it, opening brown envelopes.

[4evermaat]

 
Yes you are right and untill your post I didn't realize that I made it unclear. So yeah I was finally let in . The title of the thread was reffering to my visit back to my home country next month and me coming back whether there is a chance I am going to be denied entry? Anyway people are right and in fact I caused the harm to myself by being totally careless with the law etc. (like Thai people being caught when the Police finally stops them for driving without helmet)I would appreciate for the mod to either change the title or even close it because I unconsciously might spread wrong information because yeah I was let in .......
 
Thanks for all the info/Thread closed.

Seems to be a lot of that lately. Mis-titling of threads to get attention.

I just had a 2 friends (one over 60 and 1
I've heard of people putting a little extra ฿notes, and that was mainly for multiple VE entries. But never outright denials for having correct visa.

I concur that thread should be re-titled and locked to avoid further misinformation/trolling.

[dentonian]

13 hours ago, elviajero said:

How does the IO know the visa holder is married. All they see is someone living in Thailand for 3 years using visas rather than an appropriate extension of stay.

9 hours ago, JackThompson said:

It appears he had a Non-O Visa based on Marriage.  That is all they should need to see.  Showing "proof" was done to get the visa.  If Immigration has a problem with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (who issue visas at consulates), they can take it up with them - not hassle people who did Absolutely Nothing Wrong At ALL!!

 

 

Your missing elviajeros valid point Jack.

A Non Imm O ME Visa can be obtained based on marriage, visiting a child or being in receipt of a state pension (depending on Embassy/Consulate requirements).

There is absolutely nothing on that Visa to suggest to an IO it was issued based on the OP being married to a Thai.

The OP must leave every 90 days to re-enter and receive another 90 days, so is putting himself under scrutiny and questioning, albeit due to his younger age.

 

If the OP deposited 400,000THB in a Thai bank and obtained an 'extension of stay' based on marriage, then;

1. He could make local 90 day reports without the need to exit/re-enter every 90 days and face scrutiny.

2. An extension clearly states the basis of issue, either 'retirement' or 'marriage'.

3. It tells an IO the OP has already met the financial requirements in order to obtain an extension.

 

They are also aware a Non Imm O ME Visa can be obtained from Savannakhet with no financial proof required.

 

Edited April 16, 2017 by dentonian

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, dentonian said:

 

Your missing elviajeros valid point Jack.

A Non Imm O ME Visa can be obtained based on marriage, visiting a child or being in receipt of a state pension (depending on Embassy/Consulate requirements).

There is absolutely nothing on that Visa to suggest to an IO it was issued based on the OP being married to a Thai.

The OP must leave every 90 days to re-enter and receive another 90 days, so is putting himself under scrutiny and questioning, albeit due to his younger age.

 

If the OP deposited 400,000THB in a Thai bank and obtained an 'extension of stay' based on marriage, then;

1. He could make local 90 day reports without the need to exit/re-enter every 90 days and face scrutiny.

2. An extension clearly states the basis of issue, either 'retirement' or 'marriage'.

3. It tells an IO the OP has already met the financial requirements in order to obtain an extension.

 

They are also aware a Non Imm O ME Visa can be obtained from Savannakhet with no financial proof required.

 

Maybe you are correct on this - but their attitude (in some areas - including most airports) seems to be that Thais who marry foreigners are traitors, and both they and their husbands "are not wanted here" and should leave (see the other thread - 'Denied Entry' at Swampy).  We are dealing with people who literally tore-up a Thai-child's Thai passport, because they saw he had a 2nd one (different thread).  That's just hate - plain and simple. 

 

The OP will be leaving and returning soon - not sure if a re-entry permit on a Marriage extension would yield better results at the airport - but maybe it would.  In any case, it Should Not Be Necessary, as he already has the correct legal visa for entry.

 

Unless a  visa is invalid / fake / forged, or the person is a national-security threat, it is not their business whether he is married, retired, whatever.  Their job is to process his entry.  If the rules say he must have 20K Baht to enter , they can ask for that.  They should not in any way be unprofessional, insulting, degrading, etc at Any Point in the process.

 

If Immigration has a problem with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs vis-a-vis Savanahket, they need to deal with them directly - not by harassing people who followed the rules and obtained legal, valid visas.  Let's hope they don't, as that would break up thousands of Thai / Farang mixed families - though I suspect some would think that is a good thing.  

[dentonian]

53 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Maybe you are correct on this - but their attitude (in some areas - including most airports) seems to be that Thais who marry foreigners are traitors, and both they and their husbands "are not wanted here" and should leave (see the other thread - 'Denied Entry' at Swampy).  We are dealing with people who literally tore-up a Thai-child's Thai passport, because they saw he had a 2nd one (different thread).  That's just hate - plain and simple. 

 

The OP will be leaving and returning soon - not sure if a re-entry permit on a Marriage extension would yield better results at the airport - but maybe it would.  In any case, it Should Not Be Necessary, as he already has the correct legal visa for entry.

 

Unless a  visa is invalid / fake / forged, or the person is a national-security threat, it is not their business whether he is married, retired, whatever.  Their job is to process his entry.  If the rules say he must have 20K Baht to enter , they can ask for that.  They should not in any way be unprofessional, insulting, degrading, etc at Any Point in the process.

 

If Immigration has a problem with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs vis-a-vis Savanahket, they need to deal with them directly - not by harassing people who followed the rules and obtained legal, valid visas.  Let's hope they don't, as that would break up thousands of Thai / Farang mixed families - though I suspect some would think that is a good thing.  

I agree that in certain situations IO's overstep the mark either due to the fact they are ignorant of their own laws (Dual nationality as one example) or believe they have the authority to do as they wish.

They are Police at the end of the day and have the right to ask questions if suspicious.

 

Because of the OP's personal situation, being younger, holding a Non Imm O ME which doesn't state the basis on which it was issued and making frequent border runs, I too would be suspicious of how he can financially remain in Thailand without working illegally.

 

The OP needs to either continue as present, expect some scrutiny, but carry a copy of his Thai marriage certificate and proof of a  sufficient source of funds (bank statement) that he doesn't need to work in order to satisfy their curiosity, OR

Obtain an extension based on marriage, where his proof of marriage and funding has already been approved by Immigration.

 

How often do we read 'Denied entry on Marriage extension'?

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, dentonian said:

I agree that in certain situations IO's overstep the mark either due to the fact they are ignorant of their own laws (Dual nationality as one example) or believe they have the authority to do as they wish.

They are Police at the end of the day and have the right to ask questions if suspicious.

 

Because of the OP's personal situation, being younger, holding a Non Imm O ME which doesn't state the basis on which it was issued and making frequent border runs, I too would be suspicious of how he can financially remain in Thailand without working illegally.

 

The OP needs to either continue as present, expect some scrutiny, but carry a copy of his Thai marriage certificate and proof of a  sufficient source of funds (bank statement) that he doesn't need to work in order to satisfy their curiosity, OR

Obtain an extension based on marriage, where his proof of marriage and funding has already been approved by Immigration.

 

How often do we read 'Denied entry on Marriage extension'?

Agree on carrying proof - I have a binder of stuff to prove I am financially-independent, condo-lease, etc, for TR entries.  Now it appears Non-O folks need "proof," too. Thing is - we never heard of any threatened denials of entry on Non-O-Multiples until very recently.  First, some warnings at Poipet, a very strict entry-point  - and people there were told to "use the airport."  Seems that was a trap, with IOs in the airports lacking the civil-professionalism I experienced at Poipet.

 

I am a big supporter of border-security - keeping out the "real bad guys."  I like the lack of street-anarchy here, as compared to the lawlessness and relative-crime-danger I saw in Latin America.  It is the lack of consistency - a sort of border-police-anarchy, which I find objectionable.  If Non-O folks need "proofs" to use their visas for entry, those need to be clearly stated in a public forum.  Same for all other visa-categories.  Spell it out, then enforce it.

 

If Thailand chooses move in a "Bhutan" direction on immigration, that is their choice, however sad for the Thai people.  These random episodes at entry-points neither clarify the rules of entry, nor provide notice of when someone needs to leave retirement and take a Thai's job in order to get a B-Visa (until one turns 50), or pack it up, or whatever.

[NanLaew]

4 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Agree on carrying proof - I have a binder of stuff to prove I am financially-independent, condo-lease, etc, for TR entries.  Now it appears Non-O folks need "proof," too. Thing is - we never heard of any threatened denials of entry on Non-O-Multiples until very recently.  First, some warnings at Poipet, a very strict entry-point  - and people there were told to "use the airport."  Seems that was a trap, with IOs in the airports lacking the civil-professionalism I experienced at Poipet.

 

I am a big supporter of border-security - keeping out the "real bad guys."  I like the lack of street-anarchy here, as compared to the lawlessness and relative-crime-danger I saw in Latin America.  It is the lack of consistency - a sort of border-police-anarchy, which I find objectionable.  If Non-O folks need "proofs" to use their visas for entry, those need to be clearly stated in a public forum.  Same for all other visa-categories.  Spell it out, then enforce it.

 

If Thailand chooses move in a "Bhutan" direction on immigration, that is their choice, however sad for the Thai people.  These random episodes at entry-points neither clarify the rules of entry, nor provide notice of when someone needs to leave retirement and take a Thai's job in order to get a B-Visa (until one turns 50), or pack it up, or whatever.

Well there's always the guys that live here on extensions and don't need to hop in and out of the country to maintain a facade of living here. They tend to whine a lot about 90-day reporting though.

 

Then there's those with multiple entry O's who are a bit economical with truth when it comes to reasons for having such a visa and need to 'leave the building' frequently. One upside is no 90-day reports to whine about.

 

Then there's those with TR, SETV and METV who aren't (never were) tourists.

 

To be honest, it is well over a year since many people started reporting being advised either by Immigration or regional Thai embassies that they only need a single entry O visa based on having a Thai spouse and they should get that converted to the appropriate long-stay enabling extension on their return to Thailand. Now, if people chose to ignore this, then they can hardly start complaining about actual enforcement. Nobody is being blind-sided or misled but most are maybe guilty of being lulled into a sense of false security with 'TiT' and mai bpen rai. However, considering that there's a new sheriff in town who's not about to lighten up anytime soon, some have been remiss in keeping their priorities straight.

Edited April 16, 2017 by NanLaew

[JayBird]

10 hours ago, possum1931 said:

So if every expat who lives here, who have wifes, families and regular incomes from their own country, suddenly upped and left at the first opportunity, it would not harm Thailand in any way, and the Thai government would be glad to see us go?

You are expecting logic.  This is the country that removes street foods, despite it being one of its main tourist attraction.  The country that removes beach loungers/areas despite it being a main attraction.  Their actions may not be at all realated to their goals, and the goals of one department may be at odds with another.

 

Immigration does not get a pat on the back when Tourism figures go up.  They get a kick in the rear when they let someone in who they shouldn't. 

 

Tourism does not get a pat on the back when they stop someone undesirable from coming in.  They get a kick in the rear when they don't increase the # of people who come in.

 

No one is in charge that co-ordinates the two goals appropriately.  (This is a country that can not even introduce a seat belt enforcement policy correctly).

 

 

Stop thinking too much and you may start to see why things are done the way they are done :)

[elviajero]

19 hours ago, JackThompson said:

No where does is it written - that I have seen - that a Multiple-Entry Non-O based on marriage visa is for "short visits only."  If documentation of such exists, someone please reference it.  The same for anyone who can show a limit on how long per-year a person can visit on Tourist Visas.  Where is it written - English or Thai?

Here's a clue. You are only allowed to stay for 90 days. That is a short visit. If you want to stay beyond that you must apply for an extension of stay. Surely you must understand that a visa that limits your stay, and requires you to leave the country, is not meant as a means to live in the country.

 

A tourist is limited to a maximum stay of 90 days after which they have to leave the country. The fact that you can apply for back to back visas is not a green light that you can live in the country. They clearly don't have a problem with tourists visiting several times over the year, but equally, like other countries, they expect tourists to return home between visits.

 

Why you would want them to start enforcing limits is beyond me. It's like a turkey voting for Christmas!

 

20 hours ago, JackThompson said:

If the OP had a Non-O Multiple Entry Visa - that is the "correct visa," and what happened only shows that foreigners are being treated in an unprofessional manner at airports, even when they have valid visas, and are following Thai law. 

It is the correct visa for someone living outside Thailand that goes home between visits. If you are living in the country you have no need for a multiple entry visa (any visa), and should apply for an extension of stay. Why would anyone want to do a border run every 90 days unless they were dodging local immigration for some reason! Thai officialdom is not stupid and as married expat numbers grow the stricter they will become to ensure those living in the country are vetted by local immigration.

[JackThompson]

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Here's a clue. You are only allowed to stay for 90 days. That is a short visit. If you want to stay beyond that you must apply for an extension of stay. Surely you must understand that a visa that limits your stay, and requires you to leave the country, is not meant as a means to live in the country.

 

A tourist is limited to a maximum stay of 90 days after which they have to leave the country. The fact that you can apply for back to back visas is not a green light that you can live in the country.

The fact that there is no published limit means there is no limit.  "Live here some of the time" or "half of the time" or "67% of the time" - what is the rule?  At this point, there isn't one.  If they decide to impose a limit, no Farang is stopping them, though perhaps the predicted economic results give them pause.

 

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

They clearly don't have a problem with tourists visiting several times over the year, but equally, like other countries, they expect tourists to return home between visits.

I assume you mean "go somewhere else" between visits - my passport country is in no way "home" to me - it's far down the list.  Though some do report that going "home" for visas has some significance / legitimacy to the immigration people - an anachronistic idea, such as the notion of "work" being tied to "going to a physical location," I presume - or maybe just an assumption of what we think, that they think.  It gets confusing when nothing is written down, and all we have to go on are scattered reports and offhand remarks by lower-level persons which may reflect their prejudices more than any official policy.

 

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Why you would want them to start enforcing limits is beyond me. It's like a turkey voting for Christmas!

I don't wish for limits - but if they are going to have limits that could bite me in the backside, I would like to know precisely what those limits are, in advance.  That way, I can comport to the rules, and we can be "all smiles," relaxed, and happy when I come and go - a "win-win" result for everybody.

 

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

It is the correct visa for someone living outside Thailand that goes home between visits. If you are living in the country you have no need for a multiple entry visa (any visa), and should apply for an extension of stay. Why would anyone want to do a border run every 90 days unless they were dodging local immigration for some reason! Thai officialdom is not stupid and as married expat numbers grow the stricter they will become to ensure those living in the country are vetted by local immigration.

Some report their immigration offices are unfriendly, or they said the wrong thing and are now effectively blacklisted, etc.  Others say they like the "break from Thailand."  Others likely don't make enough money to qualify for an annual-stay - though perhaps more than a median Thai income, so a net-benefit to their families - and want to live here with their wives and/or give their kids a "dad."  It was my impression that this is why Savanakhet doesn't require financial proof - to provide a way for those families to stay intact. 

 

But, again, if there are going to be rules for these or any types of visas - "stay out a week before returning," or whatever - they simply need to publish those rules.  At that point, they can enforce them to their hearts content, and no one gets blindsided.

[dentonian]

16 minutes ago, elviajero said:

. Why would anyone want to do a border run every 90 days unless they were dodging local immigration for some reason!

1. Ignorance of how to apply for an extension. (Lazy/Stupid).

2. Can't meet the financial requirements.

3. Not a bona fide dejure and defacto marriage.

 

[Thaidream]

 

 

 

The only issue I have is that a person who has a multiple Non O based on marriage should be allowed  entry without questions.  It is true that person may be living in Thailand and normally should be getting an extension of stay. However, what if the person just cannot meet the financial requirements because they have purchased a home or a vehicle. Should they be denied entry to stay with their family? they may have an income below the requirements or their spouse maybe working.

The Universal Declaration of Rights states a person has a right to marry.However, governments have set up income levels which are arbitrary and in some cases are inhibiting a person's right to be with family. Of course, on a practical level- that person whould become employed and get a work permit or return to their home country and work and send support money.  Separation is tough.  Try it sometime and see how you feel.

 

[Happy Grumpy]

Simple.

 

Go to your local immigration office and get a 12 month Extension of Temporary Stay.

 

Done. :) 

[Frank12]

16 hours ago, dentonian said:

1. Ignorance of how to apply for an extension. (Lazy/Stupid).

2. Can't meet the financial requirements.

3. Not a bona fide dejure and defacto marriage.

 

How about having an excuse to leave your wife or go somewhere together? Thai people are lazy wife don't like to go anywhere unless forced to so having a legitimate reason to leave the country can be a good thing. And if she doesn't want to go no matter what still having 3-4 days when you don't have to be  a family guy isn't bad neither. On top of that local immigration no explaining really that there is any advantage of the other option. Not to mention that if you just search thai visa forum most searches end up with the marriage visa option so if not in the know you would assume that it is the preferable option (maybe that's stupid but several year of traveling the world teached me that if doubt follow what long term expacts in the country do instead of trying reinventing the wheel they are usually well informed about potential hickups)

[dentonian]

4 hours ago, Frank12 said:

Thai people are lazy wife don't like to go anywhere unless forced to

That was enough dribble for me......I can understand why your wife doesn't want to go with you!

I'll say no more in response, less I receive a 2 week holiday.

[Frank12]

28 minutes ago, dentonian said:

That was enough dribble for me......I can understand why your wife doesn't want to go with you!

I'll say no more in response, less I receive a 2 week holiday.

 

Point taken shouldn't made such a rude generalization. Although I have a semi-legitimate reason for saying so the big boss in our Village that owns a bunch of stuff here including the house we live in I have been asking him for fixing water dribble in the house every time there is the same answer may bpen rai lan prung nii (tommorow). It still hasn't been fixed. Had a huge problem with getting internet too. Used to joke with my wife that this is an amazing thing this tommorow because thanks to it we don't have to do anything today. BTW Trying to fix my post but it seems I can't with my previous post,oh well. Will end up as  a douchebag

Edited April 17, 2017 by Frank12

[jimster]

On ‎4‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 1:50 PM, Frank12 said:

 

Of course you are right and thats the plan. I am planning to go take my wife to my country. The problem is the son because he speaks only Thai and again in my country (Poland) there aren't that many people that speak English too and Polish is considered one of the most difficult languages to learn overall. (not to mention I am concerned about my wife ability to Learn Polish in English) and we just didn't want to leave him behind but maybe we will have to at some point (at least infrequently he will be forced to stay with grandma while either me or me and my wife will be abroad). I mean we were taking him for private English classes with the intention to reloacting to Europe but he was consistently super rebelious about it and wasn't making any progress so we just gave up doing it against him no point in forcing him to do so. And while not working I did invested the capital succesfully so it is not I was literally retired.  I was planning to create some business here in Thailand but then the legal situation seem more and more complicated so I am just concerned to do so with the junta and more and more histility towards foreginers.

Poland is a fantastic country but personally I wouldn't consider it to be an attractive place for a foreigner (especially a Thai) to immigrate to. Unlike western Europe, there are still relatively few non-Europeans living there and it might not be that easy for your wife to get a job. I would recommend you look into living where both of you will be happy. If that's Thailand, so be it. While it is not easy, it is far from impossible to find a decent job, there are after all more than 100,000 foreigners on work permits working in white collar professions in Thailand, there's no reason why you can't be number 100,001. Or start some sort of business, but do your research and be careful.

 

More hostility towards foreigners now than before the current regime? Nope, I don't feel that at all. Thailand is developing fast and is simply "cleaning up" the long-term tourists and other undesirables, but the vast majority of those on multiple entry business, marriage or other visas and extensions of stay experience no problems whatsoever.

[JIMHILL]

Can anybody here on TV confirm; a re-entry permit can be used on a 60-day Tourist Visa ?

[ubonjoe]

39 minutes ago, JIMHILL said:

Can anybody here on TV confirm; a re-entry permit can be used on a 60-day Tourist Visa ?

Yes you can get a re-entry permit to keep the remainder of your 60 day entry from a tourist valid when you re-enter the country.

[stoicccc]

i'm the one who started this thread 

 

went back home to Finland, got a new passport, new TR visa and fast track immigration service at Suvarnabhumi....and got in smoothly.

thanks for all the help!

[JackThompson]

38 minutes ago, stoicccc said:

i'm the one who started this thread ...

went back home to Finland, got a new passport, new TR visa and fast track immigration service at Suvarnabhumi....and got in smoothly.

thanks for all the help!

Great News!!  Glad to hear you made it in OK at an airport.  Fast-Track may have helped.  If I were you, I would stick to land-borders when returning from future TR-Visa runs.  After getting across the border, you can always grab a domestic flight (inexpensive when purchased in-advance) to get to where you want to be inside Thailand. 

 

Also, since you have a fresh passport, I would begin by using consulates which are more trouble when you have more TR-Visas in your passport - saving "easier" places like Vientiane until the other options are exhausted.

[stoicccc]

and thanks once again :)

 

Hopefully this advice will not apply to me as I plan to something I shouldn have done a long time ago and marry my girl...if she still takes me, hehe.

[stoicccc]

Didn't know which thread to bump so decided to go with this one:

 

If I get a multi-entry NON-O visa based on marriage, can I do the 12 month extension on any of the entries? Or can the extension only be done on the single-entry marriage visa?

[ubonjoe]

2 minutes ago, stoicccc said:

Didn't know which thread to bump so decided to go with this one:

 

If I get a multi-entry NON-O visa based on marriage, can I do the 12 month extension on any of the entries? Or can the extension only be done on the single-entry marriage visa?

You can apply a extension of stay during the last 30 days of any of the 90 day entries allowed by the visa.

[stoicccc]

Big thanks for the quick reply.

[JimmyJ]

On 4/14/2017 at 2:06 AM, JackThompson said:

 

 

• I carry the cash, proof my money comes from overseas, and my condo-lease.  If living with the GF, try to come up with some sort of lease-agreement you can carry - maybe with a copy of her blue-book.  And, yes, pics of you together - hard color-copies, in case your phone dies.  Whatever you say, they may just call you a liar, based on other reports.  How much of this is xenophbia-induced paranoia, and how much is due to a general hate of Farangs in the Immigration division, is anyone's best guess. 

"I carry... proof my money comes from overseas..."

 

What do you use for that?

(A withdrawal slip from your foreign (non-Thai) bank for the cash?

A copy of your foreign bank account monthly statement?)
 

 

[stoicccc]

On 5/4/2017 at 1:06 PM, stoicccc said:

i'm the one who started this thread 

 

went back home to Finland, got a new passport, new TR visa and fast track immigration service at Suvarnabhumi....and got in smoothly.

thanks for all the help!

Furthermore, got married finally and applied successfully for the NON-O multi-entry based on Thai spouse at Savannakhet and crossed the border at Mukdahan to come back in the country. No questions asked.

 

A question: is it correct that I can extend each 90 day entry at the immigration for another 60 days, meaning that I need to leave the country only every ~5 months?

[ubonjoe]

Just now, stoicccc said:

A question: is it correct that I can extend each 90 day entry at the immigration for another 60 days, meaning that I need to leave the country only every ~5 months?

You can extend each 90 day entry for 60 days to visit your wife.

Just be sure you do an entry on or before the enter before date on your visa to get a new 90 day entry. By doing that and getting the 60 day extension of it you can get almost 17 months of total stay from your visa.

[stoicccc]

Thanks Joe and thanks Thaivisa for valuable help, really appreciate it.

[jimster]

20 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

You can extend each 90 day entry for 60 days to visit your wife.

Just be sure you do an entry on or before the enter before date on your visa to get a new 90 day entry. By doing that and getting the 60 day extension of it you can get almost 17 months of total stay from your visa.

Is that also possible on a non-B multi-entry? Let's say your visa expires on July 31, but you come back into the country on July 30. Your permission to stay is thus 90 days later, so around October 27 (because they count the day of entry as day 1, not day 0 as some countries like China do). You then receive permission to stay another 60 days on top of that so that means you can stay until roughly December 25 or 150 days after entry.

 

When are you eligible to apply for the 60 day extension? Within a certain number of days before the original 90 day permission to stay is up? Also, if you needed to leave the country, the re-entry permit would only be valid until the end of the first 90 day period, meaning that in order to leave during the 60 day extension, you'd need to get a new re-entry permit covering that period, right?

 

Would you be able to apply for a conversion to a 1-year extension of stay for marriage during any of these two periods, i.e, the 90 day period or the 60 day period after that, even though your visa has long since expired?