30 Days On Arrival Stamp To Non-Imm "O" For Retirement

[Pattaya Spotter]

1 hour ago, Peter Denis said:

Your friend should have filled in '45 days' on the small TM-6 entry/departure card when he entered Thailand.  That would have triggered the Immigration officer to provide him with a 45-days Visa Exemption permission to stay, instead of 'honoring' the Re-Entry Permit that only provided him with 8 days remaining on this previous permission to stay.

I'm sure that  after a long 24-hour repatriation flight and the general scrum of a Covid entry to ????????, you would have had the presence of mind to fill in 45 days on your TM-6 card. Unfortunately my friend didn't [supposing he even knew that they were "giving back" the 15 days of quarantine (which they only announced a few days before his departure)]. In any case, how is having a 45 day entry any benefit as then his re-entry permit and "retirement visa" would clearly be expired/cancelled? He would have to go through the time and expense of converting his non-visa entry to a Non-Imm O visa and then go through the whole process of applying for his yearly extension again. At least now, he just files for another extension as usual, and pays the 4500 baht "quarantine" fine and 1900 extension fee?

[Pattaya Spotter]

14 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Look at your friends experience from the other point of view.

 

Had he received the 30 (45) day visa exempt entry instead.

On release from quarantine he would have to apply for the Non O stamp.

One visit to Immigration at a cost of 2,000 baht.

14 days later a second visit to Immigration to receive the now approved Non O stamp.

60-90 days later a third visit to Immigration to apply for the 1 year extension at a cost of 1,900 baht.

Two preparations of documents and trips to the bank for the Non O and the extension.

 

Taking everything into account and having being given an option at entry, I may have chosen to do exactly as your friend has actually done, just to save the time wasting and bureaucratic procedures.

Yes...I explained as you say in my reply to another poster above. 

[Peter Denis]

8 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Yes...I explained as you say in my reply to another poster above. 

@Tanoshi & @Pattaya Spotter

Both of you are of course correct.

But on hindsight your friend is indeed lucky that the Imm Officer is willing to still handle his 1-year extension of stay application with the expired permission to stay.  But it did cost him 4.500 THB over-stay and of course the stress of being on overstay and not being 100% sure how it would be handled by his local IO.

If he had opted for the 45 day VisaExempt entry, there would not have been any stress re expired permission to stay.  But as both of you correctly indicate, it would have meant a new Non Imm O Visa application (basically same requirements as a 1-year extension of such Visa, so not a big deal) but indeed with the associated admin hassle (3 IO and bank visits instead of just one).

 

[Pattaya Spotter]

12 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

@Tanoshi & @Pattaya Spotter

Both of you are of course correct.

But on hindsight your friend is indeed lucky that the Imm Officer is willing to still handle his 1-year extension of stay application with the expired permission to stay.  But it did cost him 4.500 THB over-stay and of course the stress of being on overstay and not being 100% sure how it would be handled by his local IO.

If he had opted for the 45 day VisaExempt entry, there would not have been any stress re expired permission to stay.  But as both of you correctly indicate, it would have meant a new Non Imm O Visa application (basically same requirements as a 1-year extension of such Visa, so not a big deal) but indeed with the associated admin hassle (3 IO and bank visits instead of just one).

 

Yes he was under a bit of stress not knowing what the IO ruling on his situation would ultimately be. However, after spending close to 100k to return, my friend was more than willing to pay 6400 baht to get on with his retirement (though he is shocked by the condition of Pattaya). As a thought exercise, what's the worse that could have happened in an overstay situation (after expending all the time and expense to return to Thailand during this time and actually being in-country before his re-entry permit expired)? I guess being fined for overstaying and given a 7-day stamp to leave the country. I don't think any Immigration office would stoop to that level at this time.

[ubonjoe]

12 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

But on hindsight your friend is indeed lucky that the Imm Officer is willing to still handle his 1-year extension of stay application with the expired permission to stay.

I would not call it lucky. It is not unusual for immigration to accept a late application after the overstay fine is paid.

I can even recall cases where immigration told people to overstay to reach the required amount of time for the money in the bank or get proof of income.

[Tanoshi]

2 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

If he had opted for the 45 day VisaExempt entry, there would not have been any stress re expired permission to stay. 

I'm not so sure you have a choice despite the opinion of others.

If you have a valid Visa or extension with re-entry permit, then the entry clearance officer will stamp you in accordingly. If neither of the above a 30 day Visa exempt entry stamp.

Most of the IO's at entry speak very little English in the first instance.

Perhaps if you raised the question as an option, the ECO may consult a supervisor who's decision would be based at their discretion.

 

If you enter on a Valid Visa or extension with only a limited number of days left to remain, there is no right to demand a 30 day VE entry as an alternative because it will give you a longer period of stay than the Visa or Extension entry, or for the IO to suggest otherwise.

It would be completely at the discretion of the IO even if it was your suggestion.

[Pattaya Spotter]

2 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

I'm not so sure you have a choice despite the opinion of others.

If you have a valid Visa or extension with re-entry permit, then the entry clearance officer will stamp you in accordingly. If neither of the above a 30 day Visa exempt entry stamp.

Most of the IO's at entry speak very little English in the first instance.

Perhaps if you raised the question as an option, the ECO may consult a supervisor who's decision would be based at their discretion.

 

If you enter on a Valid Visa or extension with only a limited number of days left to remain, there is no right to demand a 30 day VE entry as an alternative because it will give you a longer period of stay than the Visa or Extension entry, or for the IO to suggest otherwise.

It would be completely at the discretion of the IO even if it was your suggestion.

There does seem to be some confusion on this point. However, I do seem to remember to my younger more traveling days, when I lived on 30 and 60 day visas (before my "retirement") that the occasion would come up that on return, a 30-day non-visa entry would give me more time to stay than re-entering on my re-entry permit/visa. And that if I put down "30 days" on my TM Form the IOs would give me the non-visa entry. This was a decade ago or more so things might have changed. Maybe UJ knows more about this. 

[ubonjoe]

13 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

I'm not so sure you have a choice despite the opinion of others.

If you have a valid Visa or extension with re-entry permit, then the entry clearance officer will stamp you in accordingly. If neither of the above a 30 day Visa exempt entry stamp.

I can recall cases of a officer asking a person if they wanted to use the re-entry permit that allowed less than 30 days asking which one they wanted when entering the country.

[Tanoshi]

1 hour ago, ubonjoe said:

I can recall cases of a officer asking a person if they wanted to use the re-entry permit that allowed less than 30 days asking which one they wanted when entering the country.

My personal experience is that the vast majority of ECO's aren't proficient enough in English to either ask or answer questions. That's where a supervisor is required.