VBF

Understood. 👍 So presumably if the OP put in UK passport and UK resident that would work(?) As I intimated above, assuming the visa is granted, once you get to Thailand, nobody would know. Even handing over one's boarding pass shouldn't cause a problem - I always get my visa in UK (which is genuine in my case) fly UK-Dubai-Thailand and hand over a BP showing I've arrived from Dubai - never even questioned even though I keep the London to Dubai BP "just in case".

Bunty James?

I guessed you were, but although I replied to you to keep the thread moving, the information was for the OP. BUT...are you saying that the OP could not even access the site from KSA? If so, that I didn't know.

All Thai visa applications are now online, so the KSA embassy were correct, if a little abrupt. Apply here https://www.thaievisa.go.th/ not on any other, unofficial site. If you choose the London option, one of the questions asked will be your current location. If you say KSA, you're telling the truth, however were you to accidentally say that you're in UK, (!) I imagine the application would be successful. When it's granted, all you get is a PDF file which you must print out and present at immigration with your passport on arrival.

Or at least if in Thailand, by using the available technology to avoid being traced!

That's obvious but your previous comment made no sense at all

What ARE you on about? London to Dubai to Bangkok is hardly any sort of a diversion!

And if any doubt that the police need guns..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68927702 "Two Metropolitan Police officers who were injured have "significant but not life-threatening" injuries and will require surgery, the Met confirmed." Let's see...if they'd simply shot the worthless SoB dead........

I meant for both you and me....

Your choice. I prefer a break in my UK - Thailand flights, and Dubai is usually quite nice - I dodged a bullet with the recent floods though! 😬

So this whole conversation is hypothetical. (Always was for me!) That's that then.

Google knows 🙄

I'm with you on that one. It's a win all round - no need for a trial, no expense of keeping the sh1tbag in prison for years and a warning to his cohorts - this could be you next time.

Well so far you've avoided being caught out, mainly as you say, due to HMRC and the like being short staffed. BUT whenever you enter UK "they" do have access to your passport - remember scanning it at the airport? (Unless your "back door" avoids that, in which case I'm either calling BS, or suggesting you're making yourself vulnerable on another front) So if they were to suspect anything amiss, HMRC, DWP and Home Office can and almost certainly do exchange information. Plus if an investigation is opened they can apply for access to your bank account(s) credit card(s), Council Tax records (to which you alluded earlier) etc etc. So what you're really saying is you know you're breaking the rules but are gaming the system, so far successfully. Good luck to you but IMO, you're riding for a fall that might just come out of the blue one day and bite you in the nether regions (pardon my mixed metaphors) My only other comment is I hope you don't fall foul of HMRC - I got investigated some years ago for no fault of my own, and eventually exonerated...but it took 2 years of arguments and digging up records, letter writing, accountant conversations that I wouldn't wish on anyone. Sweet dreams! '🙄😎

The fact that you rent the apartment out on a long term basis pretty much shows that you do not live there. If there is both a rental agreement and you then state it as your address might raise interest and cause an enquiry. That might also raise interest from HMRC as to your exact status and tax liabilities. I have no idea whether either of those scenarios is likely but would tread carefully it it was me. As for the "back door", I tend to agree with @Mike Teavee comments above.

There's far more to what you just wrote mainly regarding the personalities of those involved, to whom is a duty of care applicable, who is responsible for the caretaking of the guns etc etc..... However, I'm comfortable in my opinion, so are you in yours, there are facts and statistics that support both of us so this argument is going nowhere. We'll have to agree to differ.

The government case would be that he had to prove it WAS permanent. For example... Takes a long-term lease on a property or sets up financial arrangements that only a resident would need. Something that shows one's intent to stay for more than a short holiday even if that intent changes later. I'm neither defending nor opposing this - it's just what I might do if I was a suspicious official looking to establish the situation.

Zero. It's all from people USING or rather MISUSING guns. But I get what you're saying - if they hadn't had guns etc. But 2 points: Those people would have found a way to kill someone anyway. By your logic, ban cars because of the people MISUSING them and causing fatal crashes.

Flying with those idiots you must have! One question...... Why? There are so many other airlines to choose from and yet, knowing what you're going to get you still choose Thai. Bit like banging your head on a brick wall isn't it?

And here, even though I'm British, I shall quote the NRA and say "Guns don't kill people. People kill people"

Related to the Trotters by any chance?

That particular story to which you have linked seems to me to be full of "He said, and he said" arguments. Not sure if it proves or disproves much.

That may be the case, but if one made a short visit to UK and couldn't prove that the intention to return was permanent then one may not keep the increase. Tbh, I cannot find any law on this, as you say, "legal definition of 'permanent' "

Absolutely!! The scrotes shouldn't have the guns in the first place, so they've already placed themselves outside the law so no quarter should be shown. And if that makes me a Right-wing hardliner - BRING IT ON!

I can see your point, and obviously, sympathise, however the onus is still on all of us to do our "due diligence" even though that should not be the case. Would i have done as you did? Quite possibly.