1 hour ago, genericptr said:

Then what should we do about this then? Are we supposed to demand they follow their own rules and prove they exist or just leave the country and re-enter another port to avoid those particular individuals? 

When I was spending most of my time here on Tourist Visas - and even now that I am on a Non-O Multi - I have no plans to ever enter Thailand via air.  I see no way that the convenience would be worth subjecting myself to, in essence, going through a 3rd World-style lawless corruption-enforcement zone, on my way in.  

 

The higher-ups seem content to let this situation fester - due to financial "incentives," or afraid to discipline their subordinates (semi-revolt in the ranks?), etc.  It is sad to see Thailand's reputation as a friendly, modern destination for travelers be destroyed.

 

Since I have the option to avoid these entry-point pits of mire, I will continue to opt for sane land-borders where, based on my experience and recent reports, applicants are not faced with arbitrary made-up rules.

 

Every year I have been here, I have paid less money for more condo - and it appears Immigration will help that trend continue, by driving away more and more "good guys," like the OP, who follow the rules.

Edited February 8, 20188 yr by JackThompson

Jack Thompson, so which are the «  sane » borders please ?

 

18 minutes ago, geisha said:

Jack Thompson, so which are the «  sane » borders please ?

 

were described on previous page

2 hours ago, geisha said:

Jack Thompson, so which are the «  sane » borders please ?

All land-borders except Aranyaprathet/Poipet. 

Also, possibly, Chang Mai by air, if coming in with a valid Tourist Visa (based only on a lack of horror-story reports).

 

Have 20K worth of Cash to show, if asked.

Edited February 8, 20188 yr by JackThompson

23 hours ago, Dmitry2222 said:

Why do you think, that Suvarnabhumiairport is the better place to come in? Probably, can get troubles in both.

Because there are many more reports of problems at DMK than BKK.

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Every year I have been here, I have paid less money for more condo - and it appears Immigration will help that trend continue, by driving away more and more "good guys," like the OP, who follow the rules.

I really don't understand why they targeted this guy. Some 60 year old British guy wants to spend a little more than 6 months a year in Thailand and spend his money here, is that really the worst of their problems? Maybe it's because he is in Pattaya which is a hot bed for trouble.

29 minutes ago, sometimewoodworker said:

Because there are many more reports of problems at DMK than BKK.

There are equal reports at both

4 hours ago, genericptr said:

I really don't understand why they targeted this guy. Some 60 year old British guy wants to spend a little more than 6 months a year in Thailand and spend his money here, is that really the worst of their problems? Maybe it's because he is in Pattaya which is a hot bed for trouble.

The OP did not even reach 180 days last year - only 170.  The IOs had to dig into the year before to magically-manifest the 180. 

 

The problem with people in official-positions making things up, instead of following laws and ministerial orders as part of a regulated chain-of-command, is that what you end up with are "no standards" - just arbitrary acts fueled by power-trips, and the predictable result of abject cruelty. 

12 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

The problem with people in official-positions making things up, instead of following laws and ministerial orders as part of a regulated chain-of-command, is that what you end up with are "no standards" - just arbitrary acts fueled by power-trips, and the predictable result of abject cruelty. 

They must have really not liked this guy for some reason or perhaps just some ass on a power trip and a bad day. It's just silly to think he had to working in Thailand as if a 60 year old UK citizen couldn't find a way to afford 6 months in Thailand (why would he even want to work in Thailand in the first place???). I would think he could make that point beyond the shadow of doubt.  If I was OP I would be seriously thinking about selling my condo and bailing on this place all together.

On February 7, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Tanoshi said:

Actually it's a no brainer that Thai Embassies/Consulates don't offer Retirement Visa because they don't exist.

 

Between the ages of 50 -65 apart from the Thai Elite, only the Non Imm O-A Visa is available to those who want to stay for long periods.

I believe it is to this Visa that you refer to as a Retirement Visa.

Are you saying there are isn't a Thai Embassy in England? That is very strange if you are correct.

1 hour ago, Mansell said:

On 2/7/2018 at 7:41 PM, Tanoshi said:

Actually it's a no brainer that Thai Embassies/Consulates don't offer Retirement Visa because they don't exist.

 

Between the ages of 50 -65 apart from the Thai Elite, only the Non Imm O-A Visa is available to those who want to stay for long periods.

I believe it is to this Visa that you refer to as a Retirement Visa.

Are you saying there are isn't a Thai Embassy in England? That is very strange if you are correct.

No, what he is saying is

• there is no such thing as a Thai retirement visa, though there are a number of other things (visas, extensions of permissions to stay etc.) that are sometimes referred to as such;
• the Royal Thai Embassy in London does not issue Non O visas for over 50s, other than to those in receipt of a state retirement pension (which means those under 65 will never qualify); and
• there is the Non O-A (long stay) visa for those over the age of 50 that meet certain conditions, and this is one of the most common things referred to as a "retirement visa".

A inflammatory off topic post meant to deflect the topic has been removed.  A repeat of it will result in a formal warning.

I was asked to update on my experience so will do.  I easily obtained a 30 day extension from Chonburi Immigration . All the staff I encountered there were helpful , efficient , and good humoured . My recent airport departure from the country was also straightforward.

I intend to return to Thailand in late June or July . I'm undecided yet about how long to stay . I may stay for six weeks in which case I will obtain a single entry tourist visa from the embassy . If I stay for four weeks visa exempt should be possible and I will have the required amount of cash plus return air ticket . I will have been out of Thailand for nearly three months . I would be interested to know if any of the experts on this site feel there would be any risks entering on visa exempt for a four week trip given my previous experience.

19 minutes ago, pks555 said:

I would be interested to know if any of the experts on this site feel there would be any risks entering on visa exempt for a four week trip given my previous experience.

In my view, the risk would be zero with a tourist visa. Entering visa exempt, the risk would be very low, but a very few immigration officials might decide you have been in Thailand too much. Unfortunately, the officials have discretion to deny entry to those entering visa exempt just based on their assessment that you are using visa exempt entries to spend too much time in Thailand. As said, even entering visa exempt, the risk would be very low, but I would personally be inclined to get a tourist visa just in case.

On 2/6/2018 at 9:30 PM, Tanoshi said:

So your recommending a corrupt and illegal activity?

If somebody owns a condo in Thailand and over 50, there should be no issue for the person to get a Non-O visa (for three months at least from any Thai embassy). If the law is not there, they should make it a law.  Otherwise, I don't see any moral hesitation resorting to illegal activity. Through out history people have resorted to illegal activities when the law is oppressive.  Allowing non-Thai without proper residency to buy a condo and then denying them entry is oppressive, in my opinion.

Edited April 7, 20188 yr by onera1961

On 2/8/2018 at 8:13 AM, JackThompson said:

The problem with people in official-positions making things up, instead of following laws and ministerial orders as part of a regulated chain-of-command, is that what you end up with are "no standards" - just arbitrary acts fueled by power-trips, and the predictable result of abject cruelty. 

Immigration personnel of all countries in the World are given power to deny entry even to proper visa holders. Thousand are denied entry with proper visa every year in the US and UK.

6 hours ago, onera1961 said:

Immigration personnel of all countries in the World are given power to deny entry even to proper visa holders. Thousand are denied entry with proper visa every year in the US and UK.

This is regularly confidently stated on this board, but is wrong. It is true that immigration officials in most countries are explicitly granted that power. In Thailand, the Immigration Act specifies the grounds under which entry can be denied. Only the Minister is able to designate additional circumstances under which people can/should be denied entry. No other person (immigration official or otherwise) is officially allowed to deny entry other than for the reasons specified in Section 12 of the Act.

 

In fact, when people are entering visa exempt, immigration officials effectively do have discretion to deny entry if the person entering visa exempt can reasonably be accused of using the visa exempt entry to stay extended periods in Thailand. This is because of a Ministerial Order issued in mid 2014. There is no similar discretion when someone enters with a visa.

sell the condo
transfer all your money out of thailand
dont under any circumstances enter thailand after that
holiday in cambodia and laos and vietnam instead
fly into phnom penh with qatar airlines it is currently about 5000 baht cheaper

Edited April 7, 20188 yr by Wang Lalker