Uk passport renewal for dual citizen thai

My wife, a Thai national, obtained British citizenship, residency rights and a UK passport in the UK 5 years after we married there.

We have never registered our marriage in Thailand.

She has a Thai passport in her maiden name, and a UK passport in her married name.

Next year she will have to renew her UK passport for the second time.
She will do this in the UK.

I have read that if a person has dual nationality the UK passport issuing authority now (since 2015) ask to see the other passport and will not renew the UK passport if there are different surnames. At the time of the first renewal they never asked to see her Thai passport.

Anybody got any facts or information or advice about this, such as will it be necessary to register our marriage here in Thailand so she can change her surname on her Thai passport before we return to the UK next year.

Thanks.

Where did you hear this from, her married name is her legal name in the UK in which the original passport was issued and the previous renewal. Can't see an issue, you have to declare your dual nationality on a passport application but I doubt they even check as the forms just go through a computer. Renewals are straight forward maybe an issue if it was a first passport but even then of course she would have previous passport in maiden name. Sounds like barstool talk to me. But I'm sure SeekingAss will be along shortly to put you right.

It may well be barstool talk, but we would like clarification. Both her UK and Thai passports are up for renewal next year and we dont want to get caught in some Kafkaesque Teresa May induced immigration black hole.

Apparently they ( the jobsworths at UKPA who interpret the regulations )are asking to see the second passport and have decreed that applicants can only have one identity, common to both passports i.e. one surname.

Obviously if you are black, gay, disabled a transgender or lived in grenfell tower you can do what you want, but if you are a regular law abiding citizen then the regulations are rigorously enforced.

Only issue I could see would be renewing her Thai passport. No issue with the Brit passport as applied for and issued under her legal name in the UK as a British citizen as long as declared the dual nationality and what name were previously known as no issue.

Can't even see an issue with renewing the Thai passport if never registered the marriage in Thailand and no desire to do so. As presumably you've been through immigration and airline checking in Thailand where she has had to produce both passports and never had an issue even though different names.

Its not barstool talk.

From the other channel.....

Quote:

---

the current guidance notes make it clear that the British government expects dual nationals to change their foreign name to be the same as their British name, if they want a new British passport. From page 5 of the guidance notes: British passport Guidance_Notes 2017 .pdf

If you are a dual national, you should send us a full
colour photocopy of the uncancelled non-British
passport, or British Overseas Territories Citizen passport
(every page including blank pages). If you hold a non-
British passport in a different name, you must change it
to match the name you want on your British passport.
You must do this before you make your application.

The guidance notes also specify that dual nationals in the UK are not eligible to apply online. Applicants in Thailand, as we know, are required to make an appointment online and apply in person at the Trendy Building.

---

Get it changed, you can stay at the Atlanta Hotel then:)

Can't open the pdf but ignoring the spiel at the top of the copied post do the actual guidelines say it's for renewals and new passports as in a first passport or just for a first passport?

Hmmm. Just looked at that pdf. Its titled 'applyi for a passport from outside the UK' so maybe different?

I didn't know this....

Quote:

---

Contrary to some people's belief, having a foreign surname or being married to a foreigner has absolutely no impact on their rights as Thai citizens to own land in Thailand. It used to but that was changed in 1999.

---

What changed in 1999 ?

Before 1999 if married a farang couldn't own land.

It also states that you need to change her other passport on the applying in UK form( section 2)

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload..._44_03.17_.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buriramboy

Before 1999 if married a farang couldn't own land.

---

You mean a Thai?

If a Thai was married to a farang they lost the right to own land, that changed in 1999 as in they can now marry who the fuk they want and still own a few rai of paddy fields in nakonbumfuk.

This is the latest wheeze from May's Home Office but they have no authority to do this.

Your wife will have a certificate of naturalisation. This is the name in which her citizenship has been recorded and will be the name in which she applies for her passport. If they refuse to renew her passport then simply take the matter to the Divisional Court - it will cost around £5,000 but you can retrieve your costs when they either concede or lose. I suppose that as a matter of right your wife can change her name by deed poll or by declaration to her name as recorded in Thai bureaucracy and then make the application. The Home Office has no right in law to coerce your wife into changing her Thai name to that of her British passport identity.

I have experience of this from several others but because the English are usually pussy wankers they are reluctant to stand up for themselves against the fascist cvunt May and her shiny arsed clerks - are you a pussy English wanker or are you going to create merry hell and see your MP and hurl abuse at the Passport Office wankers?

This is just another way that the fascist cvunt Maybot wants to enforce her will upon British society. I've been trying to tell you this for sometime Tax but you silly old grunters prefer your Telegraph propaganda and other Johnsonesque bilge. There is a very amusing letter appearing in today's Guardian letters page ( Opinion - sub menu ) on this very subject which you might find interesting Tax.

Oh by the way, i have just had another idea. You could inform the cvunts at the Passport Office that your wife is not prepared to accept their unlawful diktat and she no longer wishes to obtain a replacement passport. Once her old British passport has expired and you obtain evidence form the passport office that they will not issue a replacement, and you submit evidence of your wife's disinclination to obtain one, then complete an application to the Home Office for a Certificate of Entitlement ( that she has the right of abode ) to be endorsed in her Thai passport. They will not issue this if your wife holds a valid British passport but since she will not then they will have no choice but to issue the C of E.

Reads like Gullivers round 2:)
Wont their argument be If she likes her Thai surname so much, why did she change it in the UK when getting married? She didnt have to change it.

Quote:

---

I have experience of this from several others but because the English are usually pussy wankers they are reluctant to stand up for themselves against the fascist cvunt May and her shiny arsed clerks - are you a pussy English wanker or are you going to create merry hell and see your MP and hurl abuse at the Passport Office wankers?

---

It all depends on the timeframe.

We will be back in the uk next april for 6 months, during which time her passport will need to be renewed if she it be able to travel back to thailand and thence back to the uk without obtaining a visa for the uk.

The simplest solution would be for her to register our uk marriage with the thai consulate in kensington and apply for a new thai passport there, and then apply for the new uk passport.

The thought of a tussle with big brother in the uk certainly appeals, but it could drag on and on, you know what the civil service fukkers are like, and cause us to have to delay trips etc.

The right of abode option is an interesting alternative, it would be a gleeful points victory over the establishment, but she would lose her uk passport, the possesion of which is a must for so many reasons related to travel and identification and she will
not give it up lightly.

I think an approach based on pragmaticism is the way to go with this, martyrdom is more for guardianistas than telegraphistes, although i recently cancelled my subscription to the online telegraph, and now take the times online.

The telegraph had become over the past two or three years no more than a parody rag, and i can get that kind of stuff for free over at the daily mail.

The guardian has also become a ridiculous parody of itself, its like reading private eye some days, but at least its free.

The C of E, particularly supported by the certificate of naturalisation, is widely recognised by even the most stupid of check-in staff to be valid and compelling evidence that the holder is a British citizen. Although I do acknowledge that after six years of the Maybot's infection at the Home Office the potential for vindictive, malicious and demented bureaucratic gibberish is always there - the staff mostly everywhere are scarcely above the level of the neanderthal and evidently recruited out of social need or on the very prosaic grounds that they were the only meatheads who actually turned up for the interview.
British lower end employees are really quite stupid and when the EU folks quite the situation can only deteriorate.
After the latest debacle and the DUP fucking everything up I am actually quite hopeful the GFA will be abandoned and the IRA will commence their campaigns against the British and their Northern plantation orphans.
The English deserve everything they are going to get.

Apropos your experience of current 'quality' newspapers, I have to say that there are now only two publications worth the effort, the Guardian and the Times with perhaps the Independent occupying the slot as best online media digest. My paper of choice was always the Times but its editorial support for Brexit meant that in terms of impartial integrity it had lost credibility and was in truth just another cock-sucking, Tory Party lickspittle. Pity, but there it is. The Guardian is by default one's daily read although its featuring of soft, flabby- thinking socialist pundits is an irritation but can be ignored - essentially, it has got its head screwed on facing the right direction and of course has John Crace, the best parliamentary sketch writer about. I subscribed to the Times but now no more - AA Gill is dead, Winner is dead and Clarkson's stuff I read on rip-off sites. I occasionally touch base with Matthew Parris and Camilla Long but the rest is negligible.

The Guardian impartial? I've heard it all now, you really are away with the fairies. Talking about fairies no doubt Owen Jones is your favourite columnist.

Quote:

---

AA Gill is dead, Winner is dead and Clarkson's stuff I read on rip-off sites. I occasionally touch base with Matthew Parris and Camilla Long but the rest is negligible.

---

Not a fan of rod liddle then.

No, I think at heart Liddle is intellectually dishonest, a fraud who still can't acknowledge his debt to the society he thinks he still lampoons when in truth he and they are the same. He's a faux northerner thinking he still wants to piss in the soup but takes the money all the same - Will Self pinned and binned him neatly.

No, I actually much prefer reading anything Oliver Kamm writes, simply because of its beautiful simplicity and perfection.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seekingasylum

No, I think at heart Liddle is intellectually dishonest.

---

Since you favour simplicity couldn't you have just gone with 'wanker'?

I rather think you have dwelt too long in sparring with morons at their level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buriramboy

The Guardian impartial? I've heard it all now, you really are away with the fairies.

---

He did say it was facing the right direction... like "right", you know what I mean? or was that infection? What a relief those tax haven investments and BBC purchasing of 25% of their copy is sufficient to keep them from putting wikipedia-like begging messages on every article... Only fockin morons read newspapers anyway - it's just made up bollocks to wind people up to make them get hooked on outrage like some pseudointellectual smack - scarcely any different from fingering a smartphone for hours whilst you commute your miserable life away towards eternal oblivion.