@Lg ******

The OP didn't get what he paid for. The only reason for not delivering the correct product should be if the embassy could prove the applicant had submitted false documents (for example).

Anonymous participant 860 DTV's have been granted for a few dental appointments. Not five years worth. In those cases, clear grounds for only issuing a 6 months METV.

@James *******

I would agree if someone has ties to Thailand. However, if a digital nomad who could go anywhere, I would try to get my money back and give Thailand a miss.

@Henrik ****

Doesn't matter how many times and who repeats this nonsense. It remains nonsense. Paying via a Western country credit card provides the applicant with recourse.

@Henrik ****

You make a great case for always paying with a UK/Euro/US credit card where Western service standards apply. Good example yesterday where a lady received an error message but it didn't say what the error was. By trial and error she discovered the input screen didn't like the hyphen in her surname. Her application was then cancelled because her input name didn't match her passport! She lost her application fee. The embassy hadn't spend any time 'processing' her first application because it was cancelled prior to human input.

@Henrik ****

Embassy can state whatever they wish upon their website. However, by advertising a service and accepting payment to provide it they have a duty of customer care. There have been recent postings of Embassies stating their reason for cancellation/rejection. If the applicant believes their reason is incorrect they should email stating such and asking for a review. If they refuse or fail to supply a reason then a chargeback via bank/credit card company is justified and probably will be successful in reclaiming the application fee.

Our 18 hours per day troll has to divide his work between various forums. He has a strict schedule to maintain.

@Andi **********

Usually get these posts on Thursdays.

@Anna ********

If you read the comments on this thread (especially Jay Wolfpack) you'd realise that the instructions aren't 'perfectly clear'. Embassies claiming it's the applicants responsibility to check their OCR has worked correctly isn't acceptable. Other people claim using the MRZ will always be successful. Someone else states that isn't true and to ignore that advice and input name as shown in the body of passport data page. Then there is the income requirement that isn't listed on embassy webpages. One contributor says there is no minimum income limit. How do they know this? There must be because embassy staff need a yardstick to work from. Why keep it secret? All in all, a diabolical service administered with arrogance and incompetence.

@Anna ********

They are the same details. Truncated by inadequate length of field(s) in her passport. Machines are capable of matching such data. In this case software developers are obviously not. That being the case, an exception report should be printed for embassy staff to determine whether details match. They claim not to be permitted to amend input. If that is true, the solution is to allow the applicant to resubmit free of charge. You would prefer the applicant to lose her fee?