Popular Post LivinLOS Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 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. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post saengd Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 That confirms what was written by Assist Thai Visa on Facebook and comes as no surprise, for whatever reason CM Immi. seems always to be the first in the country to implement new processes, even if they are at odds with what Bangkok is doing. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 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! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivinLOS Posted October 16, 2019 Author Share Posted October 16, 2019 I realize this is a little unclear, but this is what was sent when I protested that this was incorrect info.. video-1571217653.mp4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deej Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jingthing Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 (edited) 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. To add, to those that say such reports are rumor mongering, I would say, are they really? As we have no certainty yet couldn't you also say members posting with authority DEFINITELY NOT FOR EXTENSIONS are doing a kind of rumor mongering themselves? Is there anything that wrong with just admitting we don't know for certain yet? Edited October 16, 2019 by Jingthing 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gweiloman Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivinLOS Posted October 16, 2019 Author Share Posted October 16, 2019 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. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivinLOS Posted October 16, 2019 Author Share Posted October 16, 2019 (edited) 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 October 16, 2019 by LivinLOS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post BobBKK Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 Just now, 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. 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. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Sheryl Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 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. According to what you post later local visa 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 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NanLaew Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivinLOS Posted October 16, 2019 Author Share Posted October 16, 2019 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NanLaew Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 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? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 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. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBKK Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 Just now, NanLaew said: Your visa company in Chiang Mai? Yes a very well known one. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deej Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 3 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. Hell my life. is caving in. before comitting sucide LOL please some one. get it from the The Immgration Dept in Writing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 3 minutes ago, 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 Yes but you're making an assumption that Thai immigration offices actually make that distinction. it's a reasonable assumption but based on their internal processes it might not be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post scubascuba3 Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 should close the thread, scaremongering incorrect info about non imm O 9 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 5 minutes ago, LivinLOS said: 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. Yes you got it. That's what Integrity Legal thinks. His videos explain why he thinks that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jingthing Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 Just now, scubascuba3 said: should close the thread, scaremongering incorrect info about non imm O Is a tornado warning scaremongering? Don't act like there is certainly about these issues when there isn't. Ignorance isn't always bliss. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deej Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 1 minute ago, Jingthing said: Yes but you're making an assumption that Thai immigration offices actually make that distinction. it's a reasonable assumption but based on their internal processes it might not be true. In Official Immgr Dept writing . u are with respect stirring the pot Thank u 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivinLOS Posted October 16, 2019 Author Share Posted October 16, 2019 (edited) 5 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said: should close the thread, scaremongering incorrect info about non imm O I am simply reporting what is being said (with proof in the video) by Chiang Mai immigration. I dont agree with it, I dont think this is what was announced, and I think this is an incorrect interpretation by CNX immi.. But it IS a valid report based on what is being said this morning. Your also missing the crucial point that many had stated this would not be checked at extensions (on any class even O-As) and that clearly is now proven incorrect. This is confirmation at least that after Oct 31 an extension incountry of an O-A class does require insurance. Edited October 16, 2019 by LivinLOS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Sheryl Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 Agree, incorrect interptetation by CM Imm.I would suggest anyone doing an extension there to have with them copy of the police order with the O-A part highlighted and be orepated to call the Immigration info line if necessary and have them talk to the IO. Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jingthing Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 2 minutes ago, deej said: In Official Immgr Dept writing . u are with respect stirring the pot Thank u Then put me on ignore. I am posting with total sincerity. These issues are definitely not resolved yet and I think it's a disservice to the public to play act like they are. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post scubascuba3 Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 I am simply reporting what is being said (with proof in the video) by Chiang Mai immigration. I dont agree with it, I dont think this is what was announced, and I think this is an incorrect interpretation by CNX immi.. But it IS a valid report based on what is being said this morning. no mention of non imm O in the video or line message so like i said purely scaremongering to mention it 3 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post thequietman Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 some people on retirement here are on their last legs and a post like this could actually push them over the edge. It is highly irresponsible to leave this post on here at this moment in time. Please remove it before someone does something stupid. ???? 6 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivinLOS Posted October 16, 2019 Author Share Posted October 16, 2019 Just now, scubascuba3 said: 3 minutes ago, LivinLOS said: I am simply reporting what is being said (with proof in the video) by Chiang Mai immigration. I dont agree with it, I dont think this is what was announced, and I think this is an incorrect interpretation by CNX immi.. But it IS a valid report based on what is being said this morning. no mention of non imm O in the video so like i said purely scaremongering to mention it And the part about people claiming that no incountry extensions needed insurance, only the initial issueane of the visa outside the kingdom ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 Just now, Sheryl said: Agree, incorrect interptetation by CM Imm. I would suggest anyone doing an extension there to have with them copy of the police order with the O-A part highlighted and be orepated to call the Immigration info line if necessary and have them talk to the IO. Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app The order in English. Your certainty is based on that reading but you have no knowledge of the internal processes of immigration offices where indeed there is evidence they make NO distinction between O and O-A at the time of applying for extensions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post pontious Posted October 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2019 Well unless I misheard the video clip he says only for Non O-A issued at a Thai embassy or consulate outside Thailand.. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts