Caldera

1 minute ago, lkv said:

You did not spend money on the Elite visa, that's the confusion.

 

What you spent your money on is for membership in a club.

 

Members of the club are entitled to various benefits and perks, one of the perks being a long stay visa, subject to Immigration approval.

I agree - and that doesn't exactly reassure me. Easy to see what could happen further down the line.

3 hours ago, lovesthespicy said:

They must of just changed the rule there in recent weeks. I was just there 3 weeks ago with 7 TV's in recent years in my passport and they didnt say a word to me. 

Other factors such as your age and nationality might also matter. I once took a risk in Vientiane, when the general assumption was that they will give you that nasty extra stamp when you're applying for the 3rd or 4th SETV from them. I applied for my 4th, no questions were asked and I didn't get that stamp.

That said, I don't recall earlier reports of Savannakhet (unlike Vientiane) using that stamp at all. So this might well have changed and could be a result of their much higher number of applicants nowadays.

I doubt that moving provinces is what's the issue here. I use my Thai debit cards in typically 3-4 provinces per month, each month when I'm in Thailand. I've also never heard of anyone else running into that kind of problem. Maybe they're phasing out the type of card you're using or there's another issue with your account.

Sad state of affairs, especially when you consider that this particular visa is not exclusively for people who plan to live in Thailand the whole year round.

Unfortunately, nobody can tell you with any certainty if it will still be possible to get that visa in Savannakhet come January, without proving financials as it stands now or at all.

Nice to see the return of that kind of scrutiny. That's desperately needed.

Quick and easy (partial) fix: Get rid of the muppets that deny entry to tourists at Phuket's airport. That way, at least the few who are still willing to come will be accounted for without fail.

Cry, baby, cry.

"He said parliament had not been suspended since King Charles I did so during the English Civil War. Charles was eventually executed, in 1649."

There you go, Boris. They will have to bring the hangman back for you.

Many old and a few less than promising new faces. Combined, they will rob the country blind.

1 hour ago, pontious said:

All the published emails say roughly the same thing - not one of them 'guarantee's' anything. They will do there best. That is not good enough.  They say 'should be able' 'to - not will.

I agree. Big potential headache for those who rely on showing international transfers.

7 minutes ago, dbrenn said:

I'm not sure where you're from but I'm English, and we robustly despise our officials. Read the news and you'll no doubt see that in the US, Europe and Australia, officials are also despised in equal measure, so contempt for authority may not by your yardstick be just a Thai thing.

Quite right. "A Thai thing" is going out of your way to buy lunch for the officials you despise.

1 minute ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Well, before 20th March 2016 the rule didn't apply. Did anyone knew that before I posted the update? Caldera, did you? Be honest?

I've been knowing that since 2015, back then the upcoming change was widely publicized in an effort to make overstayers leave before the new rules came into effect.

17 hours ago, Wizzy said:

1.Above the entry stamp it was written TR0066, is that some kind of a code signifying that I rather not try to enter again?

Probably your flight number if it's written above the entry stamp, maybe you can check again (their handwriting can be hard to decipher).

3 hours ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

A visa from an embassy, or consulate does not guarantee the right to entry. The final decision is up to the Immigration department.

This is the same for every country.

At face value, there's nothing wrong with what you wrote. Immigration does need the power to deny entry, at least as a last line of defense.

What differs from one country to the next is how responsibly a country's immigration officers use that power and how well immigration and consular service are integrated. I don't think that the Thai authorities do a decent job in that regard. In the OP's case and similar other cases, I think it's obvious that they've inflicted unnecessary hardship.

6 hours ago, dbrenn said:

I'd have still invited them to a modest lunch as a courtesy, and (if they accepted my invitation) eaten just a token amount myself if I was already full.

 

Would have been a small price to pay for some priceless goodwill, as they tell their colleagues and bosses how nice you were.

I can see why you were a good fit to apply for Thai citizenship. I genuinely don't mean that in a negative way - some of us adapt easier to Thai customs than others.

That said, many Thais I know despise their officials even more than I do. While they wouldn't openly show disrespect for obvious reasons, I think what you've described goes above and beyond even by Thai standards.

Let's hope that they will eventually be tried and punished for their countless crimes. Something major would need to change to make that happen, obviously.

3 hours ago, murraynz said:

and thai immigration, also expect us to wear long trousers etc , to show respect..

I do dress respectfully whenever I visit immigration. I also have politeness in my heart when I arrive there - I just want to get things done smoothly and as long as they don't ruin it, I will be top of the "polite and soft-spoken" class throughout. I would do the same when visiting a government office in my home country or anywhere else in the world. I extend the same basic courtesy to Thai officials, that just comes naturally to me.

Buying lunch or booze for government officials, on the other hand, is not something I've ever done or would ever consider doing. If that ever becomes a problem, I will change countries, not my attitude.