Not allow to do Visa RUN

[KhaoYai]

On 10/23/2018 at 5:02 AM, ubonjoe said:

By air there is no limit to entries with or without a visa.

Joe, at the Thai Consulate in Hull on Monday I was advised that there is now a limit of 6 visa exempt 30 day entries by air. I was also told that if an officer suspects that you are not actually a tourist and using the exemption other than its intended purpose - they have been instructed to refuse entry for any number of entries - just what I was told.

Edited October 24, 2018 by KhaoYai

[Cyclone88]

On 10/23/2018 at 5:09 AM, macgver said:

The immigration officer spoke to my wife (government officer). He want to help, but can’t do anything. It is their computer system barred one day out-in Thailand, as just implemented by the main office. So everywhere Border is the same. He says that if you fly, it is not a problem to do Visa run.

I'm really amazed at the amount of foreigners that are married to Thai ladies that are all Government Officers. 

Where does everyone find them?

[tingtongtourist]

16 minutes ago, Cyclone88 said:

I'm really amazed at the amount of foreigners that are married to Thai ladies that are all Government Officers. 

Where does everyone find them?

i believe its a secret province called Imagineaburi.

 

[BritTim]

4 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

Joe, at the Thai Consulate in Hull on Monday I was advised that there is now a limit of 6 visa exempt 30 day entries by air. I was also told that if an officer suspects that you are not actually a tourist and using the exemption other than its intended purpose - they have been instructed to refuse entry for any number of entries - just what I was told.

The folks at the Hull consulate are good people, and less clueless than at most Thai consulates. In general, you should ignore what Thai consulates tell you about anything other than their own services. Bar stool warriors are more reliable. In this case, there is an element of truth to what they told you, though their advice is garbled. Here are the facts underlying what you were told:

• The immigration official receives a notification if you are trying to enter Thailand visa exempt, and have six or more visa exempt entries since around the middle of 2015. This is not an instruction to deny entry. It is prompting the official to scrutinize you more closely than usual as a genuine tourist.
• Back in 2014, a police order was issued that instructed immigration officials to block people from using visa exempt entries to stay extended periods in Thailand. This was followed by a statement from the Prime Minister that "the rule should be applied flexibly". The upshot is that officials have pretty much total discretion to admit or deny entry to those trying to enter visa exempt. Each official will make their own decision based on how they feel about long term tourists generally, and the individual traveler in particular.

Some successfully use dozens of visa exempt entries over the years without trouble (especially overseas workers using visa exempt entries to visit their girlfriends many times a year). Others have been denied visa exempt entry abruptly because of the length of time they have spent in Thailand using tourist visas, even though they have rarely used visa exempt entries.

[BritTim]

2 hours ago, Cyclone88 said:

I'm really amazed at the amount of foreigners that are married to Thai ladies that are all Government Officers. 

Where does everyone find them?

Many low level government officials (and teachers who are also government officials) actually come from humble circumstances, but have received sufficient education to get themselves on the lower rungs of the ladder. The pay is dismal (unless in a position to benefit from corruption) and decent, financially secure foreigners are seen as eligible husbands. I have met officials up country who have shown interest, and I am no Adonis.

 

Although the pay is low, there are certain perks to being a government official. Also, for someone from a poor background, it confers a substantial increase in social status. As with any other group, everyone is different, but some can make excellent wives.

[macgver]

This is the conversation between the officer and me.

 

There is no problem in Aranyaprathet Immigration exiting and entering back, but then you need to stay overnight in Cambodia or hang around the casino hotels for a night. However, many foreigners misunderstood the statement.

 

If they allow you to do the Visa run on the same day, the officer must write a detailed report why he/she allow you to enter the same day. The main office always sends the investigate to check the work. If they find something wrong, they will face questioning or suspend their duty or transfer them. 

 

They also said that every foreigner enter the country, you can enter twice a year only, except Malaysians or Non-Imm visas. It was in the news, the officer said.

 

For people flying "out" or "in" the same day, there is no restriction for all the Non-Imm visas. 

 

If the person traveling in and out Thailand very frequent, they always advice ONLY, why don't you apply for Non-Imm visa inside Thailand. Eg, my case is a Non-Imm O (dependent), you can show 400,000 baht in my account for two months. Then you don't need to do a visa run. We want to make sure that you can take care your wife. For Thai man marries to foreigner woman, it is more easy to apply, don't need to show the 400,000 baht.

[ericthai]

4 minutes ago, macgver said:

This is the conversation between the officer and me.

 

There is no problem in Aranyaprathet Immigration exiting and entering back, but then you need to stay overnight in Cambodia or hang around the casino hotels for a night. However, many foreigners misunderstood the statement.

 

If they allow you to do the Visa run on the same day, the officer must write a detailed report why he/she allow you to enter the same day. The main office always sends the investigate to check the work. If they find something wrong, they will face questioning or suspend their duty or transfer them. 

 

They also said that every foreigner enter the country, you can enter twice a year only, except Malaysians or Non-Imm visas. It was in the news, the officer said.

 

For people flying "out" or "in" the same day, there is no restriction for all the Non-Imm visas. 

 

If the person traveling in and out Thailand very frequent, they always advice ONLY, why don't you apply for Non-Imm visa inside Thailand. Eg, my case is a Non-Imm O (dependent), you can show 400,000 baht in my account for two months. Then you don't need to do a visa run. We want to make sure that you can take care your wife. For Thai man marries to foreigner woman, it is more easy to apply, don't need to show the 400,000 baht.

Cambodia law states you must stay 24hrs. Never heard of any investigation if you dont stay as most boarders it's "over looked" with a small donation.   The IO's both Thai and Khmer side make up rules all the time! 

 

[macgver]

2 minutes ago, ericthai said:

Cambodia law states you must stay 24hrs. Never heard of any investigation if you dont stay as most boarders it's "over looked" with a small donation.   The IO's both Thai and Khmer side make up rules all the time! 

 

The Thai Immigration Officer don't investigate you, but then the MAIN Immigration Department will send his team to investigate the officers. If any wrongdoing, the officers will face the music. 

[Belzybob]

On 10/24/2018 at 12:11 PM, timendres said:

And there are many posts here demonstrating exactly that problem.

Exactly, tourist visas are for tourists. Residency visa are for residents. I wonder why so many find it so hard to understand.

[Belzybob]

On 10/24/2018 at 11:16 AM, jackdd said:

 

Living in Thailand on a tourist visa is not forbidden, so that's no reason to deny entry.

Hopefully nobody is going to follow your stupid and absolutely incorrect advice. You are obviously a star TV poster.

[Belzybob]

21 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

Joe, at the Thai Consulate in Hull on Monday I was advised that there is now a limit of 6 visa exempt 30 day entries by air. I was also told that if an officer suspects that you are not actually a tourist and using the exemption other than its intended purpose - they have been instructed to refuse entry for any number of entries - just what I was told.

What you have been told is almost correct, but the 'limit' part is not entirely true, for as Ubonjoe ( the only near permanent and reliable source on this site) wrote that its not written anywhere. The part that is absolutely true is where you say: " that if an officer suspects that you are not actually a tourist and using the exemption other than its intended purpose - they have been instructed to refuse entry for any number of entries". One day the clowns that perpetuate nonsense on this web site will be kicked out.

[jackdd]

44 minutes ago, Belzybob said:

Hopefully nobody is going to follow your stupid and absolutely incorrect advice. You are obviously a star TV poster.

I didn't give any advice in my post. But i will give you one: There is a button to edit existing posts, so you don't have to post three in a row.

 

48 minutes ago, Belzybob said:

Exactly, tourist visas are for tourists. Residency visa are for residents. I wonder why so many find it so hard to understand.

One reason why so many people find it hard to understand is that there are no "residency visas" in Thailand.

[Belzybob]

18 minutes ago, jackdd said:

I didn't give any advice in my post. But i will give you one: There is a button to edit existing posts, so you don't have to post three in a row.

 

One reason why so many people find it hard to understand is that there are no "residency visas" in Thailand.

I replied to three separate posts, as each had different issues.

 

Obviously you are finding it hard to understand the difference between visa types; it will probably require pictures to get it across, but I'll try to explain it in text first.

 

+ A tourist is a person who visits a country for short term recreation; they intend to return to their country of domicile after a finite period. If the period away from home is more than a few weeks, its likely that they will visit two or more countries. They will obtain a tourist visa from the countries they visit, unless they are fortunate to be able to get visa free entries  AS A TOURIST.

 

+ A person that is not a tourist intends to stay in a country for work, education, retirement etc etc.  They have to obtain a visa that fits their requirements, but NONE of them are a TOURIST visa. They are effectively taking up RESIDENCE in the country and require a visa that suits their RESIDENCE status.

 

All of the people posting about the terrible things the Thais are doing to enforce visa requirements seem oblivious to the fact that their own countries are probably (unless you come from a real shit hole third world country) way way more restrictive in their visa entry requirements. I'm not defending the Thai junta or its section 44 rules, but they have the right to enforce their own laws on this.

 

[Yeahbutwhytho]

3 minutes ago, Belzybob said:

+ A tourist is a person who visits a country for short term recreation; they intend to return to their country of domicile after a finite period. If the period away from home is more than a few weeks, its likely that they will visit two or more countries. They will obtain a tourist visa from the countries they visit, unless they are fortunate to be able to get visa free entries  AS A TOURIST.

 

+ A person that is not a tourist intends to stay in a country for work, education, retirement etc etc.  They have to obtain a visa that fits their requirements, but NONE of them are a TOURIST visa. They are effectively taking up RESIDENCE in the country and require a visa that suits their RESIDENCE status.

 

 

What about long term tourists that have money to travel as long as they like

[JackThompson]

16 hours ago, macgver said:

If they allow you to do the Visa run on the same day, the officer must write a detailed report why he/she allow you to enter the same day. The main office always sends the investigate to check the work. If they find something wrong, they will face questioning or suspend their duty or transfer them. 

I can believe the local-authority does this - but what "main office" is involved?  Why are the rules at Ban Laem, Ban Packard (same area) different?

 

16 hours ago, macgver said:

They also said that every foreigner enter the country, you can enter twice a year only, except Malaysians or Non-Imm visas. It was in the news, the officer said. 

Visa-Exempt by land only.

 

16 hours ago, macgver said:

For people flying "out" or "in" the same day, there is no restriction for all the Non-Imm visas. 

 

If the person traveling in and out Thailand very frequent, they always advice ONLY, why don't you apply for Non-Imm visa inside Thailand. Eg, my case is a Non-Imm O (dependent), you can show 400,000 baht in my account for two months. Then you don't need to do a visa run. We want to make sure that you can take care your wife.

The Thai wife is in the position to be best qualified to be the judge of whether support is "adequate" or - Most Importantly - could be improved-upon with a change of husband. 

I have to wonder if these guys can actually convince themselves, through some bizarre rationale, that the Thai wives of Western husbands would be "better off" if they forced the husband to move to Vietnam, Cambodia, or the PI?

 

1 hour ago, Belzybob said:

that if an officer suspects that you are not actually a tourist and using the exemption other than its intended purpose - they have been instructed to refuse entry for any number of entries". One day the clowns that perpetuate nonsense on this web site will be kicked out. 

The "other than intended purpose" are specifically listed in the Immigration Act.  They include "entering to work illegally," "not having money to fund one's stay," etc.  There is no "too many days / entries over X time-period" rule or "cannot come back the same day" rule in existence, except as pertains to Visa-Exempt entries.

 

The clowns are those citing non-published made-up rules, such as quoted to the OP of this thread.  But they can, in fact / reality, deny-entry for whatever reason they want, and then pretend/document that you violated one of the "real" rules, even if you did not.

 

14 minutes ago, Belzybob said:

A tourist is a person who visits a country for short term recreation; ...

We would need a reference in Thai-Law, citing this definition, as it pertains to the use of Tourist Visas.  Something vague exists for Visa-Exempts in the form of a Ministerial Order - but, as yet, nothing regarding Tourist Visa use.  As it stands, it is the activity of the visitor (specifically, what they may not do) which determines if they are a Tourist, or not.

[jackdd]

15 minutes ago, Belzybob said:

Obviously you are finding it hard to understand the difference between visa types; it will probably require pictures to get it across, but I'll try to explain it in text first.

 

+ A tourist is a person who visits a country for short term recreation; they intend to return to their country of domicile after a finite period. If the period away from home is more than a few weeks, its likely that they will visit two or more countries. They will obtain a tourist visa from the countries they visit, unless they are fortunate to be able to get visa free entries  AS A TOURIST.

 

+ A person that is not a tourist intends to stay in a country for work, education, retirement etc etc.  They have to obtain a visa that fits their requirements, but NONE of them are a TOURIST visa. They are effectively taking up RESIDENCE in the country and require a visa that suits their RESIDENCE status.

This is nothing more than your personal opinion. Afaik there is no official Thai definition of "Tourist", which is the main problem why everything is so unclear.

As everybody here probably knows there is no official limit on the time somebody can spend in Thailand on tourist visas, so when you say a tourist is somebody who spends a short term in the country this is obviously wrong when looking at it from a Thai government point of view.

People with non-immigrant visas are not taking up residence. If somebody is getting "permanent residency", then he is taking up residency. If you ever read any Thai laws you will find that people on non-immigrant visas are considered "temporary visitors", the same as people with a tourist visa.

Did you ever think about the definition of "non-immigrant"? The name itself makes it clear that they are temporary visitors and not residents.

So quite obviously both your personal definitions have flaws and clearly don't match what the Thai government thinks about it.

[JackThompson]

On 10/24/2018 at 3:40 PM, dotpoom said:

You cannot wear the same cloths for two days running?

After standing in the "hot box" Cambodian immigration building at Poipet, after the better (but still-hot) Thai side arrangement - and also walking the casino-strip in the sun, I was ready to shower and change clothes immediately upon entry - often renting a room to freshen-up before the journey to Phnom Penh that evening.  For the OP - it would be a bummer to have to put those sticky-clothes back on again the next morning. 

 

But, there is a little market in town where one might find some clothes which would work in a pinch - if they aren't too dusty - at least while laundering the others.  But this is contingent on if a laundry with an actual "clothes dryer machine" in Poipet exists (wasn't when I was there, before). 

[CharlieH]

Flame posts removed.

[arithai12]

4 hours ago, Yeahbutwhytho said:

 

What about long term tourists that have money to travel as long as they like

Travel means you are changing places. You can travel around the world for 10 years without ever returning to your home country, that's certainly being a tourist.

 

It would be my understanding that if you are spending more than 6 months per year - continuously or in repeat visits -  in one country then you are effectively a resident with a number of implications e.g. regarding taxation and you should take care of having the proper kind of visa. Even more so if, as seems the case for some of this "long term tourists" to use your definition, you have a specific connection such as a wife, a bank account, a local driver's licence and maybe some sort of economic activity.

 

But it's just my view. Apparently that of some IOs too.

[arithai12]

4 hours ago, jackdd said:

People with non-immigrant visas are not taking up residence.

A non-imm doesn't give you permanent residency, true. But you can claim that you are a resident of Thailand, at least for the duration of your visa or extension. e.g. you can register as living here with your embassy, you can choose to pay your taxes here rather than in your home country, and so on.

 

[AYJAYDEE]

6 hours ago, jackdd said:

This is nothing more than your personal opinion. Afaik there is no official Thai definition of "Tourist", which is the main problem why everything is so unclear.

As everybody here probably knows there is no official limit on the time somebody can spend in Thailand on tourist visas, so when you say a tourist is somebody who spends a short term in the country this is obviously wrong when looking at it from a Thai government point of view.

People with non-immigrant visas are not taking up residence. If somebody is getting "permanent residency", then he is taking up residency. If you ever read any Thai laws you will find that people on non-immigrant visas are considered "temporary visitors", the same as people with a tourist visa.

Did you ever think about the definition of "non-immigrant"? The name itself makes it clear that they are temporary visitors and not residents.

So quite obviously both your personal definitions have flaws and clearly don't match what the Thai government thinks about it.

many of them have taken up residence 

 

[Yeahbutwhytho]

4 hours ago, arithai12 said:

Travel means you are changing places. You can travel around the world for 10 years without ever returning to your home country, that's certainly being a tourist.

 

It would be my understanding that if you are spending more than 6 months per year - continuously or in repeat visits -  in one country then you are effectively a resident with a number of implications e.g. regarding taxation and you should take care of having the proper kind of visa. Even more so if, as seems the case for some of this "long term tourists" to use your definition, you have a specific connection such as a wife, a bank account, a local driver's licence and maybe some sort of economic activity.

 

But it's just my view. Apparently that of some IOs too.

I like how you're creating your own definition out your ass and calling ita day. Why 6 months? Show me where 6 months is the limit.

 

A bunch of salty fools on this forum, I suggest focusing on your own issues than worrying about anyone else because its obvious you're posting out of spite

[balo]

Yes where does 6 months come from ? 

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, balo said:

Yes where does 6 months come from ? 

Tax-policy, I assume.  It is not part of Immigration laws I have seen.