Jump to content
BANGKOK
LivinLOS

Chiang Mai immigration demanding insurance for extensions

Recommended Posts

The OP is pretty much what the Integrity Legal lawyer on youtube has been saying consistently. I am hoping he is wrong. But it's been unclear. I've been pushing back about anyone stating that they know for sure what's going to happen starting next month for EXTENSIONS either way. Why rush projecting CERTAINTY when there isn't enough basis for it? Of course it may end being yet another Thai immigration hodgepodge of different offices doing things different ways. God help us!

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has April Fool.s Day come early.

Let.s see  it in Official Writing 

To my knowledge. all reports since  the Official announcement  are Bunkum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didnt believe it, but buddy is in CNX immigration now and they are informing people that 'retirement extensions' for dates after 31st Oct now must have insurance. If the extension is due before end of the month they are still processing it without it. 
 
He even sent a video with officer saying this and confirmed by local visa agent also. 
 
To my understanding thats counter to everything stated online and in press but hey.. Good old officer discretion again ?!? 

I fail to see why an 'extension based on retirement' which can be a extending a non imm O, rather than a non imm O-A, is now processed according to non O-A rules, or why those rules are being forced when all information said it was only when the visa was issued outside the kingdom, but thats how its apparently being done. 
 
I am sure it will be different all over, but thats this morning in Chiang Mai. 
  

Does this apply only for O-A or NonO as well?


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gweiloman said:


Does this apply only for O-A or NonO as well?

What appears to be said is that all extensions based on retirement are being treated as an O-A type no matter which initial visa generated the permission of stay thats being extended. 

 

I find that incredible, and find that counter to everything thats been said so far.. So dont shoot the messenger as I believe this to be wrong, but reports are that CNX is demanding insurance for retirement extensions, no matter the way those permissions of stay were created. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

BTW -- if Chiang Mai is really going to enforce it this way, I would suggest they probably mean ALL extensions, not only those where the applicant started with an O-A. Again that's how the Integrity Legal guy reads it -- ALL retirement extensions. 

It sounds like thier position is an extension based on retirement is under the class of O-A. 

 

It shouldnt be IMO, the O-A is a specific visa class, but thats what is being said. 

 

Marriage extensions are currently not being asked for this. 

Edited by LivinLOS
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

What appears to be said is that all extensions based on retirement are being treated as an O-A type no matter which initial visa generated the permission of stay thats being extended. 

 

I find that incredible, and find that counter to everything thats been said so far.. So dont shoot the messenger as I believe this to be wrong, but reports are that CNX is demanding insurance for retirement extensions, no matter the way those permissions of stay were created. 

If indeed Chiang mai Immigration are making a(nother) unilateral declaration of independence when it comes to enforcing making up immigration rules and the O's are getting lumped in with the O-A's insurance shake down, I foresee a rush of uninsured and unattached O's frantically seeking Thai spouses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sheryl said:

According to what you post later local vida agent did NOT confirm that all extensions need it. She talks only of O-A visa.

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I am told, they are calling all retirement extensions this class, she was replying to someone who was extending on the basis of marriage. So it didnt apply to his case. 

Also I am informed I was wrong above, extensions being done now, but whose extension date is after the 31st, are still being done without it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Non-O retirement is not a Non O-A (as you know) and does not require the insurance I had that confirmed in writing by my visa company.

Your visa company in Chiang Mai?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

What appears to be said is that all extensions based on retirement are being treated as an O-A type no matter which initial visa generated the permission of stay thats being extended. 

 

I find that incredible, and find that counter to everything thats been said so far.. So dont shoot the messenger as I believe this to be wrong, but reports are that CNX is demanding insurance for retirement extensions, no matter the way those permissions of stay were created. 

Yes that been something that the Integrity Legal guy has been focused on in a number of videos. According to him expats are living in fantasy land if they think that Thai immigration views extensions based on original O or O-A visa are different. According to him they are viewed exactly the same, There is evidence that he is correct. Once you enter the extension system in Thailand, it never makes one bit of difference. Is he right about that? I don't know. The party line here is that he is wrong. All I know at this point is UNCERTAINTY.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...