SammyT

40 minutes ago, Otis Cribelcoblis said:

There is so much wrong with the logical flow of your argument that I don't know where to begin. 

 

You're obviously high-maintenance so go on your way.  You're not worth my time.

Resorting to a condescending attempt at belittling me and then reverting to an ad-hominem response, while doing nothing to actually try and rebut my argument. Well done. You're good at this debating thing. 

I'm the one who is high maintenance? As opposed to all the people on here who are upset because an IO didn't smile at them?

You never addressed my point though (presumably because you can't) - do you expect the immigration officers in your home country to ask questions of foreigners entering your borders? If so, why should it be any different when a westerner enters Thailand?

1 minute ago, Pilotman said:

I guess what is doing the bending is the inconsistency of the IO's interpretation of what is correct and what is not.  I don't think any reasonable person would argue that an IO job is profiling for the bad people, but they should know under what rules they are operating  and be consistent in applying them. That's what winds people up, me included. Being stupid and uninformed is not acceptable just because you wear a uniform. Unfortunately, this is a problem in a lot of countries, not just Thailand. 

Hard to disagree with you here. Although, with any sort of profiling work, where it involves human nature and judgements, things will always been non-uniform in how they're applied. 

For example, in any law enforcement around the world, there will always be officials who bring their own personal biases to the job. There will also always be people who care about their job and exercising their duties way more than others in the same role. So for every IO who just stamps a passport without as much as a second glance because they hate there job, there will be the one who wants to ask questions. My point is, it's best not to take these things personally. Occam's razor would suggest that the reason for an IO being hard on someone isn't because they have some personal vendetta against that person. 

22 hours ago, ZZHELICOPTER said:

I love it here but dont want to live in fear. i tried to move some money out and they blocked it. i am scared.

Not gonna lie - this line here made me think this is a pisstake. I transfer money back and forward around the place and have never had anything blocked

47 minutes ago, JT65 said:

Yes, the first day is from. 9am to 4pm for training only and then the next day is another full day of practical training.
 

Given the amount of death and destruction on the roads involving motos, it's probably not a bad thing, to be fair. 

1 hour ago, JT65 said:

Thanks so much
Is there another way to get the licence without spending two days at the transport office?
Private School?

Sent from my G3226 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Not sure. When I did it a few years back it was only a half hour theory test and a 60 second practical test. The times they are a changin'...

18 minutes ago, JT65 said:

Motorcycle Licence exam
Is the written exam for the motorcycle the same as the car?
I heard there is an example online somewhere?

Sent from my G3226 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I used this one a few years back and it was good. 

http://thaidriving.info/

I read these threads re visas and think that I must have had an incredibly charmed run in the last few years to have had zero issues renewing a visa and zero problems at immigration offices in general (aside from pushy Chinese trying to shove in line when turning up at 8am). I've found the Chiang Mai immigration people to be getting better rather than worse. 

I genuinely do feel sorry for those among us having these issues though, I imagine the stress of wondering if you qualify for next visa or not could be pretty overwhelming. 

1 hour ago, possum1931 said:

3 hours ago, Puchaiyank said:

The 800k baht has been a requirement for retirement visas for years...the embassy income letters have been exposed as a farce...put the money in a Thai bank and move on...or just move.

Another member of "if you don't like it go home" brigade.

Nope, more likely a member of the "common sense" brigade. Or the brigade who respect the right of the Thai government to make a rule and enforce it. 

I'm picking you're a member of the "I'm a rich farang and should be able to do what I like" brigade?

6 hours ago, a977 said:

So there you have it folks straight from the horses asses mouth At Jomtien . When is someone going to explain to these cretins the difference between what the police order states and what a Memorandum is PLEASE 

Given those two sentences, I'm 100% sure you probably didn't pass the attitude test on the day which may have allowed them to offer you some discretion as well... Keep rolling with your western superiority complex and I'm sure life will only get easier for you here.

My understanding was you could do two border runs per year? I've not heard anything to suggest that they are unlimited. 

The general whinging from the long term "tourists" around the place (read: been here for years, rather than months) is that it is getting harder and harder

On 1/6/2019 at 7:54 PM, Patriot1066 said:

My wife had a UK licence for a moped you used to get it automatically if you got a car licence, when she changed her licence at Chaingmai she got her full bike licence which sort of made me wonder, as she’s never ridden a bike, but now Mrs J is an expert on big bikes! But still hasnt fully realised a hundred KMH isn’t fifty MPH he he

 

I'm able to change my Thai motorbike licence (which I got so I could ride my 125cc moto) for a full motorbike licence when I return to New Zealand, completely bypassing the 18 month graduated licencing system they have there for motorbikes. Seems a bit ridiculous that I can go and ride whatever I want in NZ with no limits, despite my Thai moto driving test only being about 60 seconds long, conducted by a disinterested official who went inside and got a coffee while I did the test. 

3 minutes ago, Essecola said:

These other places like Cambodia, Vietnam, and the Philippines are not safe and don't have as reliable medical services as Bangkok. I have nowhere to go. 

How long have you been here on a tourist visa? Not old enough to qualify for retirement etc?

4 hours ago, Essecola said:

I don't have a place to stay in my home country and I don't want to live in Cambodia or Vietnam. Where am I supposed to go? I am not working here illegally. This is frightening.

Aim for refugee status? Actually, scrub that, Thailand doesn't recognise refugees. 

Seriously though, I think "I don't want to live in Cambodia or Vietnam" isn't sufficient reason for you to be able to just remain here forever on a tourist visa.

12 minutes ago, BritTim said:

That aside, there are officials who just get pleasure out of denying people entry, or forcing them to do things like buying expensive air tickets before admitting them. The motives are not always monetary.

"Official goes out of his way just to be super difficult, thus potentially putting his job at risk in doing so"

Sounds an urban legend passed among angry old expats to me. I've never had any issues with immigration officials the dozens of times I've come through airports and land borders. Maybe I just got lucky...

21 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

41 minutes ago, SammyT said:

Yes, how dare they stop people from living here semi-permanently and long term on tourist visas, just because that's what you did.

How dare they violate the laws they are sworn to uphold, throwing thousands of Thais out of work every month by doing so.

You have zero evidence to back up the assertion that thousands of Thais are being put of work every month just by them cracking down on people having repeated tourist visas. You make it sound like they're shutting actual tourism down, which they aren't. 

21 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Quote

It's just the long term residents who don't qualify for other things and are too cheap to stump up for an elite visa who won't come.

So 99% of those who stay here more than a few weeks/yr.

Again, it's not the people who are staying here for more than a few weeks a year who are being interrogated. It's the ones who are coming on a tourist visa, doing a visa run out of the country for 24 hours then turning around and coming back in then doing that again that are being target. Like I've said before, but you've conveniently ignored - the ones who do it for 11 months of the year.

The people who are coming for a couple of week 4 times are year don't seem to be having any issues. If they were, you'd certainly hear about it on here. 

16 minutes ago, BritTim said:

I believe this is a disagreement about the conditions under which immigration should deny entry to those trying to enter with a tourist visa. On the one hand are people who think the official's decision should be determined by the relevant law (which is perfectly clear in the Immigration Act). On the other side are those who think Thai immigration laws ought to be more akin to most other countries and, regardless of what Thai law prescribes, seek to impose what they consider a more logical set of rules.

 

My own view is that Thai law ought to take precedence. If those laws are defective, they should be changed, at least to the extent of adding something to Section 12 of the Immigration Act like "Officials can deny entry if in their judgement the traveller is seeking to enter for reasons other than those specified on their visa". Currently no such provision exists and, on the contrary, the Immigration Act states that officials have no discretion with only the Minister allowed to make exceptions.

 

The current law (and failure to change it) may seem contrary to Western logic, but I believe it to be based on sound reasoning, even if rather outdated. It seeks to minimise the scope for corruption. Unfortunately, senior officials in Thailand have a lot of autonomy, even when their actions are not lawful. As a result, the attempt to prevent officials from having too much power and monetising that power is not very successful.

Completely agree with this. In New Zealand the immigration officials have the mandate to deny someone entry who they believe is flouting the conditions of their visa (i.e. not a tourist, intending to work on the tourist visa etc) or if they believe they are of bad character. A nice blanket law that allows them to use their professional discretion. 

No one has quite pointed out exactly what an IO here gets out of refusing someone entry who is repetitively using tourist visas. No one has said they've been asked for a bribe etc. I suspect it's not because the IO hates white people, I'm sure it's literally because they don't believe the person is a legitimate tourist, which they clearly aren't in the situations described by many above

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

 

 

I am now within a couple months from the age to get a retirement-visa, so this really isn't "about me."  The issue, for me, really is about the harm being done to the country and its citizens by a few bad-actors, who control a few key entry-points to the country.  Also, the thought that others would not be able to do what I did - or better yet, get here much younger than I did, and have more time to enjoy the good life.

Yes, how dare they stop people from living here semi-permanently and long term on tourist visas, just because that's what you did. I doubt it is doing any harm to the country at all. Regular tourists will still come, even those who want to stay for the duration of two tourist visas will still come. It's just the long term residents who don't qualify for other things and are too cheap to stump up for an elite visa who won't come. And I'm pretty sure they're fine with that. The ex-bar girls will find someone else to marry.

2 hours ago, JackThompson said:

I have yet to see "genuine tourist" defined in Thai law in the context of Tourist Visas. 

You're definitely clutching at straws here. It's pretty blatant that someone who is living here long term, in the same place using only tourist visas and border runs to survive is not a genuine tourist. You know the one, has a Thai gf who they have been living with for a year, or works from an apartment they have been renting for the last 9 months. It's pretty well common sense that this person isn't a "tourist" within the spirit of the visa laws. I suspect you're one of these people, hence why you are arguing the point so hard. 

21 hours ago, JackThompson said:

In some respects, it would be nice if the problem entry points would at least publish their unlawful profiling system, so those who are not willing to travel to law-abiding entry-points could at least know what is expected (how long to stay away and spend their money elsewhere). 

"Unlawful profiling system" LOL. Thai immigration officers don't have to accept people on tourist visas who they don't think are genuine tourists. People who have been here on multiple tourist visa with only 24 - 48 hours in between each one are always going to attract the ire of immigration officers. You seem pretty bent out of shape by this and your arguments are getting a little bit irrational. 

Good guys in, bad guys out!

On 12/18/2018 at 12:07 AM, fforest1 said:

On 12/17/2018 at 7:53 PM, LivinLOS said:

Elite visa, Investor Visa.. 

 

If your wealthy enough for those they want you.. They set the level of wealth they desire, not you. 

So a persons value in life is based on how much money they have....

 

A very wealthy person would be a person who is highly valued as a person..Dispite any other qualities....

A person of modest means is a 2nd or 3rd class person whos presence is distasteful and they are lucky if they are even tolerated.... 

You clearly don't understand how immigration works the world-over do you? Most countries require some sort of investment by a long term resident, whether through contributing to the workforce or through investment. Have a look at your own home country's immigration requirement, you'll probably find some sort of investment visa there too. So yes, in answer to your question, I'm pretty sure Thailand doesn't want a "2nd or 3rd class" person living long term in their country, contributing minimally by not working or investing and doing it all under a tourist visa. 

I can't believe that some people struggle to understand that concept.

On 12/17/2018 at 9:57 PM, HueMungis said:

I’m 23 years old.  I was fortunate enough to inherit some properties in an area of Chicago that has become upscale.  I do the visa run things.  I’m too young for retirement, not naive enough to get married at 23 to a girl I met at a bar and a huge language barrier.  I don’t work, unless you count looking at the stock market and arranging funds here and there periodically.  I can buy an elite visa, but I just don’t think it is worth the investment for a few reasons.  I don’t mind doing visa runs because it gives me an excuse to go do something and leave the country.  I don’t mind standing in line at the airport for 15-20min, it’s not worth $15k USD, I can stand.  Who knows if I’ll even want to still be here in 3 years.  I can become a teacher  for a Non B, but

A) I don’t want to stand in front of a room of 40+ elementary school kids screaming, pretending to teach, but really being an overpaid babysitter.

B) I have no desire to “teach”

 

I’m not spending all my time getting drunk and causing trouble and giving farang a bad image, I go out once or maybe twice a week.  

Great story (if real, given you've made one post). But if you don't want to shell out for an elite visa, you can't be pissed if you suddenly find yourself denied entry on a tourist visa, given you quite rightly pointed out you don't want to do any of the above jobs you listed. 

Enjoy your inherited wealth - no hate from me in relation to that, only envy, but there aren't heaps of countries in the world that just make it open slather for anyone to come and live long term without contributing in some way to society.

On 12/17/2018 at 10:13 PM, JackThompson said:

Quote

This is a bit of a non-event really. I'm sure Thailand won't miss those who work here long term on tourist visas, no matter how much they claim they stimulate the local economy. 

Ask those who are losing their jobs which support their families about that, before you decide this is the case.  I have.  They want immigration to stop bringing in floods of people who don't support good jobs, and stop blocking those who do support good jobs (and whom they prefer to be around, generally).

Rubbish. People aren't losing their jobs because a select few people who want to live in Thailand long term without doing it through the official channels get turned away. This is not affecting regular tourists in any way possible. Just the ones who don't meet any other criteria and want to free-load here. 

You're being a bit dramatic suggesting people will lose their jobs because of this loophole tightening