IO told me Visa Amnesty = overstay today refused conversion to Retirement without 29,500 "VIP" service!

[eppic]

5 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

Hi, the guy that successfully applied for his 30-day extension of stay, from his Tourist Visa of which the permission to stay already expired is @London Boy 

I am pretty sure he won't mind you contacting him for more details on how he did it.

As mentioned, he applied immediately after he got the 30-day permission, for the 90-day Non Imm O Visa for reason of retirement.  That application was accepted and is now 'under consideration' (which is the usual procedure).  Please note that when applying at Bangkok IO this also involves a 'house visit' to check whether you are indeed staying at the place you indicated on the Non Imm O application.

@Peter Denis,

 

This is excellent news, the first confirmed case of such extension + Non-O app in BKK for quite some time (Ubonjoe did note that he believed this should be possible).  Do you happen to know if this was done at Chaengwattana, Muang Thong Thani, or required trips to both?  I believe all extensions of Tourist/VE since 13 July are supposed to be done at MTT, but then the Non-O (retirement) would need to be at CW.  So it would be ideal of course if both could be completed back-to-back at CW.

 

[Peter Denis]

10 hours ago, eppic said:

...

This is excellent news, the first confirmed case of such extension + Non-O app in BKK for quite some time (Ubonjoe did note that he believed this should be possible).  Do you happen to know if this was done at Chaengwattana, Muang Thong Thani, or required trips to both?  I believe all extensions of Tourist/VE since 13 July are supposed to be done at MTT, but then the Non-O (retirement) would need to be at CW.  So it would be ideal of course if both could be completed back-to-back at CW.

He had to do the 30-day extension of stay at the newly opened Muang Thong Thani office, and then had to go back to CW for his 90-day Non Imm O Visa (retirement).

He now has an under consideration stamp and when applying at CW, this means he will get a visit by IO to check whether he is indeed living at the location as mentioned in the TM30 (part of his application).

[Peter Denis]

3 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

He had to do the 30-day extension of stay at the newly opened Muang Thong Thani office, and then had to go back to CW for his 90-day Non Imm O Visa (retirement).

He now has an under consideration stamp and when applying at CW, this means he will get a visit by IO to check whether he is indeed living at the location as mentioned in the TM30 (part of his application).

@eppic

On my request he opened a thread on the Forum sharing his experience for the benefit of other TVF members in similar situation.

Here the link > https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1173073-succcess-converted-my-tv-into-a-non-o-on-tuesday-almost/?do=findComment&comment=15621206

 

[MellowFellow]

Thanks everyone.  This thread is the most relevant to my similar but not the same predicament.  Special thanks to WuhaVagabond for raising the topic and Peter Denis for informative comments.

 

Visa On Arrival, expiration Apr 1.  On Apr 1, obtained a 30-day extension for THB 1900 (or, 1.9 to abbreviate).  Later, Thai gov announced the 30-day free extension and yet later the 90-day automatic (no paperwork) extension.

 

Could have avoided spending 1.9.  But, I would have been in "overstay" based on the last stamp in my passport.

 

Question:  What is the legal definition of an "amnesty visa" and "overstay"?

It seems whether the 30-day and 90-day extension of tourist visas is called an amnesty visa or not, legally IO should not be able to claim that you are in "overstay"?

 

I am not a Thai legal expert.  I did take a USA business law course in college and recognize that a written legal definition can be different from a common use definition.

 

So, I am curious as to the legal definition versus the practical definition.  From hard experience, I know there are some people who will hold you to a legal definition, even though it may not make sense in some situations.  Just some hard-headed people.

 

My experience:

 

I think I understand most of the Thai visa-related abbreviations:  IO = immigration office (or officer, not input/output),  CW = Bangkok IO on the street named C...W...  (not country western), non O = non-immigrant O visa (not another visa type other than O visa), TV = tourist visa (not transvestite, why are so many tv's hanging around foreigners?), WP = work permit (not work paper).

 

This morning I went to Jomtien IO.  Thai male at the first desk looked at the last stamp in my passport.  He pointed to the 4th line on his desk sign.  It said, no paperwork required.  He said, you are ok to July 31.

 

I said, I want to apply for a one-year visa.

 

He gave me a ticket, 7A001.  It was for desk #7, the only one in a side office and not outside with the other desks in the main room.  Bad omen.

 

Inside the office, when asked I provided  my bank guarantee letter (original) and my bank's 6-month statement for my account's transactions (original). She asked for my  bank passbook?  I showed it to her.  She took it and photocopied every page.  Later, I had to signed every photocopy page. My bank passbook showed I opened the account in 2014 and in 15 months I made a series of deposits totaling 800.  So, I held over 800 continuously in my account since mid-2015.  It was meant as down payment on a condo, but have never found a good condo in Pattaya.

 

I gave photocopies of the first and last pages of my rental lease-contract, its unit ID, owner's passport ID page, and google map of location [barely printable by my newly-purchased Brother DCP-1810W scanner/copier/printer from laptop].

 

One lady said, the stamp in my passport showed that I overstayed.  For special handling to get a non O visa would cost  22.  Second lady said, 23 for 15-month, which was a 90-day non O visa expiring July 31 and a one-year visa.  For multi-entry, 3.8.  Together 27.  (Yes, she rounded up.)

 

By comparison, a few years ago, an office on soi 13/1 or 13/2 wanted 60.  In March the photocopy place outside IO wanted 45 for one-year visa.  In April another agent on Jomtien soi 5 said IO was not issuing any O visa.  Day before yesterday, an office on Pattaya South Road wanted 35 for 15-month visas, multi-entry, and one month with visa application no later than Friday, July 17.

 

I asked, get visa today?  She replied, yes.  After I paid her, she said to return in two weeks for my passport.  She gave a long explanation, too complex for me.

 

Upside:  I paid, more or less, Pattaya market price.  Avoided going to Bangkok and avoid the risk of catching a bad virus in a city full of risky people and maybe some Egyptian soldiers.  (A few weeks ago, I saw a few Arab-looking young clean-cut males walking around Pattaya and wondered how they got through the lockdown).  Have some peace of mind on my visa situation if pandemic measures last in Thailand and other SE Asian countries for up to a year.

[Peter Denis]

Thanks for your report and glad for you that your application for the 90-day Non Imm O Visa for reason of retirement was approved.  So your worries are over!

Note: You are presently 'under consideration' but that is standard procedure and nothing to worry about. In course of coming days Immigration will make a visit to the address you put on the Visa application, to check whether you are indeed living there (standard procedure in Bangkok area).

When you go back in 2 weeks the 90-day Non Imm O Visa will be provided (and immediately voided) and the 90-day permission to stay stamped in your passport on the basis of that Non Imm O Visa.  In the last month of that 90 day permission to stay you can then apply for the 1-year extension of stay based on your original Non Imm O Visa.

 

One thing is not clear for me from your report, so maybe you can clarify.

You wrote that you entered Thailand on a Visa on Arrival, but I presume you mean a Visa Exempt entry.  That entry provided you with a permission to stay till 1 April.

Unfortunately you then applied for the 30-day extension of stay your Visa Exempt entry entitled you to.  I mention 'unfortunately' because it was not necessary for you to apply for that 30-day extension (as you were already on the Amnesty) but by doing so you unnecessarily used your 'life-line'.

This resulted in you having to apply directly for the 90-day Non Imm O Visa from your Amnesty extension (without the option to apply first for the 30-day extension which would have provided you a valid permission to stay). 

But luckily IO at CW was willing to accept your 90-day Non Imm O Visa application, even with you being on the Amnesty.  However they charged you 23.000 THB for that 'service'.

My question > Is the above rendering correct?  Or did I misunderstood something?

You also wrote that you did meet the financial requirements for your application, so IO only had to 'overlook' the fact that you applied from an Amnesty extension instead of from a 'valid' permission to stay (which your 30-day extension could have provided you).

I can imagine that you are relieved they were willing to do this, but paying 23.000 THB for that service is not very 'friendly' especially since there are in-country IOs that would accept your application without charging anything for it.  

 

It's important to know for people in a similar situation like yourself, that IO at CW is willing to accept a Non Imm O Visa application for reason of retirement from your VisaExempt (or TouristVisa) entry, even with an expired permission to stay and being on the Amnesty.

But it seems from your story that at CW this comes at a price...

 

[clorox]

3 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

This resulted in you having to apply directly for the 90-day Non Imm O Visa from your Amnesty extension (without the option to apply first for the 30-day extension which would have provided you a valid permission to stay). 

But luckily IO at CW was willing to accept your 90-day Non Imm O Visa application, even with you being on the Amnesty.  However they charged you 23.000 THB for that 'service'.

My question > Is the above rendering correct?  Or did I misunderstood something?

You also wrote that you did meet the financial requirements for your application, so IO only had to 'overlook' the fact that you applied from an Amnesty extension instead of from a 'valid' permission to stay (which your 30-day extension could have provided you).

this section also confuse me too, your financial requirement was in place, unless there's something else