12 month Extension based on Thai-born child.

[DLang]

Is there any change in procedure on the immigration side of things for getting a 12 month extension based on having a half-Thai child that was born and lives here, rather than doing so based on a Thai wife?

 

Presume money is the same - 400k in the bank for 2 months or 40k p/m income.

 

What else do you need to show immigration? 

 

Just a birth cert etc?

 

It would be via Chang Wattana, is there a home visit thing where, like the Thai spouse extension, they come out and investigate the home and interview the neighbours?

 

Cheers.

[ubonjoe]

If you are still married you cannot do it based upon being the parent of a Thai.

If you were never married to the child's mother you will need to have your parenthood legitimized to apply for the extension.

The application process is about the same a marriage. Home visit and etc. Photos of you the child in and around the house.

[holy cow cm]

37 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

If you are still married you cannot do it based upon being the parent of a Thai.

If you were never married to the child's mother you will need to have your parenthood legitimized to apply for the extension.

The application process is about the same a marriage. Home visit and etc. Photos of you the child in and around the house.

Never been visited at my home all of these years based upon being a parent. Not that I would care. Immigration several times told me and the common wife that marriage applications are far easier than the other. Cross that bridge when the kids are past the 18 -20 year too old stage.

[elviajero]

5 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

If you are still married you cannot do it based upon being the parent of a Thai.

That is not true. I received three extensions in a row from two different offices (including CW in Bangkok) as the parent of a Thai with my wife (their mother) present.

[ubonjoe]

1 minute ago, elviajero said:

That is not true. I received three extensions in a row from two different offices (including CW in Bangkok) as the parent of a Thai with my wife (their mother) present.

I am just stating the rule. What you were able to does not mean it will be the same for others.

[elviajero]

1 minute ago, ubonjoe said:

I am just stating the rule. What you were able to does not mean it will be the same for others.

There is nothing in the written rules that says you must be divorced. It was a senior officer at CW that told me it can be done. The fact that I have done it THREE times proves it can be done.

 

You said "If you are still married you cannot do it", which is simply not true. If the IO/office want to process the application on the basis of being a parent they can.

[ubonjoe]

6 minutes ago, elviajero said:

There is nothing in the written rules that says you must be divorced. It was a senior officer at CW that told me it can be done. The fact that I have done it THREE times proves it can be done.

 

You said "If you are still married you cannot do it", which is simply not true. If the IO/office want to process the application on the basis of being a parent they can.

The rule does imply it is meant for a single parent. They would not of written 2 separate requirements if it was for being a parent or being married.

I can assure you many that have tried and have been told no. Especially if it was a case of trying to dodge the 2 month requirement for the money to be in the bank.

[elviajero]

6 hours ago, DLang said:

Presume money is the same - 400k in the bank for 2 months or 40k p/m income.

No. The 40K is the same but the 400K would only need to be in the account on the day you apply.

 

6 hours ago, DLang said:

What else do you need to show immigration? 

Just a birth cert etc?

It would be via Chang Wattana, is there a home visit thing where, like the Thai spouse extension, they come out and investigate the home and interview the neighbours?

If you are married they will want all the same paperwork as a Thai spouse extension, but if you have a Thai child they can waive the need for the 400K to be in the bank for two months. They will want your wife and child to be present and want your marriage certificate, wife's house registration book, wife's ID, child's registration book, child's birth certificate, photos at home, a map to your home and copies of your passport. I don't think CW require a TM.30, but get your wife to complete one anyway.

 

I don't think CW do home visits, but if they do it's possible they will do it for a Thai child extension. Most offices only do it for the first extension at their office.

 

[elviajero]

1 hour ago, ubonjoe said:

The rule does imply it is meant for a single parent. They would not of written 2 separate requirements if it was for being a parent or being married.

I can assure you many that have tried and have been told no. Especially if it was a case of trying to dodge the 2 month requirement for the money to be in the bank.

The rule says if you are a Thai parent you only need the cash in the bank when you apply. It doesn't imply that you have to be single. If you had to be a single parent it would say so. I am sure some IO's at some offices have refused to do it because that is the case for many immigration procedures due local policy/procedure. The whole point is to avoid the need to have 400K in the bank for 2 months. That requirement can be waived for someone that is married IF they have a Thai child.

 

I read the rule, following actual personal experience and conversations with CW immigration, to say that if you are married you need 400K in the bank for 2 months, but if you are parent you don't. That implies a married parent doesn't need the 2 months because they are a parent.

 

Regardless of what is written and how it's interpreted, the fact remains that extensions based on being a parent are being issued when married so your generalised advice/opinion that it cannot be done is wrong. 

 

[DLang]

Thanks very much Elviajero.

 

 

Seasoning the 400k for 2 months wouldn't be an issue.

 

If it cuts out the home visit and other nonsense, it is what I would be more interested in. 

 

Thanks again.  

[DLang]

22 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

If you are still married you cannot do it based upon being the parent of a Thai.

This doesn't seem to be the case.

 

Now you are saying the rules just 'imply' this, and don't state it. 

[ubonjoe]

2 minutes ago, DLang said:

This doesn't seem to be the case.

 

Now you are saying the rules just 'imply' this, and don't state it. 

I can only tell you how most offices apply the rules. They are 2 different reasons for the extension application. If you qualify for marriage they should do it for that reason.

Just because he managed to get away with it that does not mean you will be able to do it.

Since you don't have a problem with the funds being in the bank for 2 months you should do the extension based upon marriage. There is very little difference between the 2 and at some office the one based upon being a parent can be more complicated than marriage.

[baansgr]

Different offices have different criteria, I for one have had to have the 400k in bank for 2 months. Also although divorced the mother still needs to visit immigration depending where you are. Other requirements, photos, map etc etc etc

[elviajero]

8 hours ago, DLang said:

Thanks very much Elviajero.

 

Seasoning the 400k for 2 months wouldn't be an issue.

 

If it cuts out the home visit and other nonsense, it is what I would be more interested in. 

 

Thanks again.  

I found out about this because I messed up my proof of income when applying for a marriage extension at CW. The IO said that if I could immediately top up my bank account to 400K they would issue the extension as a parent. So I organised a transfer into my account, went down stairs and updated the passbook, and got a letter from the Kasikorn bank. The following two extensions were completed by topping up my bank account on the day rather than messing around with income affidavits or tying up money needlessly. I applied 1 month early just in case they moved the goalposts, but on both occasions, at two different offices, the bank account was accepted without question.

 

 

[elviajero]

8 hours ago, DLang said:

This doesn't seem to be the case.

 

Now you are saying the rules just 'imply' this, and don't state it. 

The written rules (police orders) and only really good for knowing what extensions are available. The criteria (paperwork) required for getting any extension varies across the country, so the police orders are only good as a guide. A lot of the requirements that get asked for are not published because, since the last publication of the police orders, additional orders have been issued. Also, offices do have a certain amount of autonomy under the control of the senior officer.