I'm confused

[covfefe]

I arrived in DMK on Saturday via flight with SETV from Vientiane. The Thai officer was confused when he looked through my passport so I was sent to another person next to the office. She said I stayed in Thailand over 180 days. I had to show her a flight ticket from Thailand to United States for August 19th but she still stamped me for 60 days. She wrote down the flight information on the arrival card, took a photo of me and typed into the computer. She also told me to go back home or get Non-O, Non-B or education visa. Can I still stay in Thailand?

[Get Real]

As you already state, she stamp you in for 60 days, so that is how long you can stay for now. Staying on too many tourist visas for long time is a well known problem. If I were you I would take her advice and consider a long stay visa. That is if you will qualify for them, though. If not I guess you will have to take your chances from TV to TV. It might work or it might not work.

[elviajero]

You can stay until whatever the ‘admitted until’ date is that’s stamped in your passport.

[overherebc]

Just to add the 180 days in a year rule doesn't exist any more.

That rule/law was withdrawn/cancelled a few years ago.

Don't know why some Imm' officers keep bringing it up.

[ubonjoe]

3 minutes ago, overherebc said:

That rule/law was withdrawn/cancelled a few years ago.

I think the one you are thinking of one for visa exempt entries.

As far as I know there never has been one for tourist visa entries.

[overherebc]

10 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

I think the one you are thinking of one for visa exempt entries.

As far as I know there never has been one for tourist visa entries.

2014 the 90 day max in any 180 was withdrawn.

That would equate to 180 days in a year.

It was removed because they started to believe it would reduce income from long term tourists.

[NanLaew]

6 minutes ago, overherebc said:

It was removed because they started to believe it would reduce income from long term tourists.

But there are no 'long-term tourists' are there?

[jackdd]

5 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

But there are no 'long-term tourists' are there?

Do you have a better name for people who stay in Thailand long term for tourist purposes?

[elviajero]

24 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Don't know why some Imm' officers keep bringing it up.

Clearly because one of the guidelines they have when assessing whether or not the ‘tourist’ has stayed too long is 180 days.

 

This ‘unofficial rule’ has been quoted many times at many borders so something exists.

 

If an official limit were imposed in it would almost certainly be 180 days/year. Hopefully it will stay no more than a guideline.

[elviajero]

16 minutes ago, overherebc said:

It was removed because they started to believe it would reduce income from long term tourists.

Lol! No it wasn’t.

 

It was removed because it became impractical for the IO’s to go through a passport and manually count the days, within the last 180 days, spent in the country. And it was replaced with an alternative way to stop long term tourism using visa exempt entry.

 

They have been actively using different ways to reduce long term tourism since 2006.

[overherebc]

35 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Lol! No it wasn’t.

 

It was removed because it became impractical for the IO’s to go through a passport and manually count the days, within the last 180 days, spent in the country. And it was replaced with an alternative way to stop long term tourism using visa exempt entry.

 

They have been actively using different ways to reduce long term tourism since 2006.

In reality if you don't have PR or an elite visa what else are you.

Even married to a Thai you are basically here as tourist with long term permission.

[OJAS]

1 hour ago, jackdd said:

Do you have a better name for people who stay in Thailand long term for tourist purposes?

Yep, "achievers of the impossible"!

[elviajero]

1 hour ago, overherebc said:

In reality if you don't have PR or an elite visa what else are you.

Even married to a Thai you are basically here as tourist with long term permission.

Unless you have PR you are a temporary visitor that is given permission to stay for one of many reasons. Tourism is just one of the reasons for visiting.

[JackThompson]

On 7/24/2018 at 7:46 PM, covfefe said:

I arrived in DMK on Saturday via flight with SETV from Vientiane. The Thai officer was confused when he looked through my passport so I was sent to another person next to the office. She said I stayed in Thailand over 180 days. I had to show her a flight ticket from Thailand to United States for August 19th but she still stamped me for 60 days. She wrote down the flight information on the arrival card, took a photo of me and typed into the computer. She also told me to go back home or get Non-O, Non-B or education visa. Can I still stay in Thailand?

This will only happen if you enter at some airports (both Bangkok airports and some others) or the Poipet land-crossing.  The other land-crossings enforce the published rules, and don't make up non-existent rules.  You are lucky you had a flight-out, in-hand to show.

 

Note that if they had denied your entry, they would not have stamped "over 180 days" in your passport, as that is not a valid reason for denial of entry.  They would have claimed you did not have the funds to support yourself, or were working illegally, as those are legit reasons for denial of entry, though given without any evidence they are true. 

 

To avoid this in the future:

If coming from Vientiane, the best option is to cross at Friendship Bridge, where you will not be given any problems entering.  Then take a van or "fly-ride" from some airlines to the Udon Thani airport (~45 minutes), then fly domestic (no immigration involved) to your destination.  Similar can be done from Savannakhet to Mukdahan's friendship bridge (via fly-ride or van), or Malaysia, entering by land (the train via Pedang Besar is the best option), then flying out of Hat Yai. 

 

Always be sure to have 20K Baht worth of cash to show, if asked (more likely from Malaysia), plus the exact-address of where you will be staying.

[elviajero]

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

This will only happen if you enter at some airports (both Bangkok airports and some others) or the Poipet land-crossing.  The other land-crossings enforce the published rules, and don't make up non-existent rules.  You are lucky you had a flight-out, in-hand to show.

Does that come with a guarantee? What rules are the IO's at the airport making up?

 

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Note that if they had denied your entry, they would not have stamped "over 180 days" in your passport, as that is not a valid reason for denial of entry.  They would have claimed you did not have the funds to support yourself, or were working illegally, as those are legit reasons for denial of entry, though given without any evidence they are true. 

The reason 180 days is often quoted is that it is the unofficial red line at which point IO's should scrutinise a so called 'tourist' more closely. ( 6 x 30 day VEE flag for example). I'm sure you don't believe that a visitor staying 6 months plus is still doing so for tourism. Most, like me and probably you, first enter as genuine tourists (holidaying) and end up staying because we like it so much. We decide to live in the country and use any means possible to make that happen. Immigration have systematically been making that harder to do as a 'tourist' since 2006.

 

If a 'tourist' has been in the country for months/years they have not proven to immigration that they have the 'appropriate means of supporting that stay'. 180 days wouldn't be used to deny entry because section 12.2 is the catch all that give the IO the lawful right to deny entry. Apropriate means would be a job, cash (x min) in a Thai bank, or a certified (by embassy) income. The requirement of most wanting to stay long term.

 

Although 180 days wouldn't be used it is relevant to 12.2 because the longer you stay the more having an appropriate means of living comes in to play, as does the need for many to work (increased suspicion of working). IMO one reason the financial requirement was introduced for the METV was to make someone, planning several visits, prove they have the means to do so, and can afford a long term stay. Having 10K/20K in your pocket is a separate/additional requirement.

 

I know you like a conspiracy theory, but if you follow/understand the changes made since 2006 it is obvious that the IO's are under orders and some are enforcing their discretionary power more than others.

 

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

To avoid this in the future:

If coming from Vientiane, the best option is to cross at Friendship Bridge, where you will not be given any problems entering.

Maybe at the moment, but again how long does your guarantee last? In the past most 'visa runners' used the land borders, and there were loads of reports of people being hassled (including Nong Khai). The advice became to use the airports as at that time there were few reports of problems. Immigration have clearly caught on to the fact that 'visa runners' are using air more often and are clamping down as they did at the land borders. If/when 'visa runners' start using the land borders in numbers again we will see reports of hassle at the border again. Aranyaprathet seem to be ahead of the curve. 

 

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Always be sure to have 20K Baht worth of cash to show, if asked (more likely from Malaysia), plus the exact-address of where you will be staying.

Having 10K/20K is good advice, but it should be made clear that even with that cash you can still, lawfully and reasonably, be denied entry under 12.2.

[JackThompson]

On 7/29/2018 at 4:27 PM, elviajero said:

On 7/29/2018 at 12:25 PM, JackThompson said:

This will only happen if you enter at some airports (both Bangkok airports and some others) or the Poipet land-crossing.  The other land-crossings enforce the published rules, and don't make up non-existent rules.  You are lucky you had a flight-out, in-hand to show.

Does that come with a guarantee? What rules are the IO's at the airport making up?

It comes only with knowing that this has been the case for years.  It is fair to say that, *if* a ministerial order were issued with new instructions, then this could change.  The "2x visa-exempt land-crossings per calendar year" is an example of a "real rule" which was codified by ministerial order.  For now, the only locations reported as telling applicants non-existent rules - i.e. not found in the law or published ministerial instructions - are Poipet and some airports (both in Bangkok, plus some others).

Examples?  You have been reading this forum longer than I have, so I am sure you are familiar with the reports.  A recent invention is, "You cannot be here more than 180 days" (and then extending the "starting" date back in time to come up with "over 180 days," when that figure was not reached in the last 12-mo).  There is no such published regulation in existence, which would explain why most border-points do not enforce it.

[stud858]

I haven't heard of anyone having problems with METV.

You get total 8 months or there abouts.  Especially if you are back to your normal abode for a few months in between.