Multiple Entry Tourist Visa

[Highlander61]

I have booked flights leaving in the UK in early November and returning the end of March, will this be accepted by embassy when I apply for the visa online

[bigt3116]

You got your answer on April 30, when you asked the same question. This was one of the replies to your question.

 

"

I'm in Thailand on my second METV issued from the London Thai Embassy

 

On both applications they wanted to see the full itinerary for the first part of the trip (first flight in and flight out within 60 days).

 

My flights are always on single tickets and I would upload only the first flight ticket into the website application. Both times they sent an email asking for extra documents - full itinerary 2 tickets. ( I also sent a note saying I did not know the itinerary after the first flights as I would be travelling around, This explanation was accepted)

 

And heres the actual email  they sent, copy and pasted.

 

     Dear Applicant,

     Visa application on hold. Please email the following document(s) to [email protected], quoting your passport number on the email subject title.

     Travel booking confirmation - Flight booking confirmation shows your all itineraries from the UK/Ireland to Thailand and the onward flight also shows your 

     name as a passenger (E-ticket).

    *Please note this is an auto generated e-mail. Please do NOT reply to this email.

    Best wishes,
    E-Visa Team"

[DavidH51]

For a multiple entry tourist visa you must show them a flight out of Thailand and back in some time later. Otherwise you will receive a single entry 60 day visa at METV price.

[JayClay]

2 hours ago, DavidH51 said:

For a multiple entry tourist visa you must show them a flight out of Thailand and back in some time later. Otherwise you will receive a single entry 60 day visa at METV price

When I applied for my METV I had a ticket that was returning 11 months later. The METV was granted.

 

I don't even know why the OP is asking if Nov - March would be a problem; that's within the 6 month METV validity. 

[sabaiguy]

9 hours ago, JayClay said:

When I applied for my METV I had a ticket that was returning 11 months later. The METV was granted.

 

I don't even know why the OP is asking if Nov - March would be a problem; that's within the 6 month METV validity. 

Exactly correct based on my recent experience with LA consulate.  Although my return was only 4 months not 11(?).  How did you get away with that?  DavidH51 is incorrect based on my experience.  Guess every embassy/consulate is different, like every Thai immigration office is different.

[JayClay]

8 hours ago, sabaiguy said:

 Although my return was only 4 months not 11(?).  How did you get away with that?

Well even if an METV is stricktly supposed to be for people who want to go travelling, I suppose it's reasonable to expect that once the time available for travelling within Thailand has expired, one might wish to go about elsewhere and then return to Thailand before finally flying home?

 

Or maybe the person processing my application was just having a bad/good day ????????‍♂️.

[Bday Prang]

On 6/25/2023 at 10:40 AM, DavidH51 said:

For a multiple entry tourist visa you must show them a flight out of Thailand and back in some time later. Otherwise you will receive a single entry 60 day visa at METV price.

               That is not correct. METV are only supposed to be available to people who are applying from their home countries or countries in which they have been granted residency rights. They want to see a flight into thailand from your home country as proof that this is the case. 

               They then want to see proof of  a ticket out of Thailand to show that you have an intention to leave  There is no need to show a ticket for a flight back into Thailand at all, at least not as far as the London embassy is concerned.

[Bday Prang]

7 hours ago, JayClay said:

Well even if an METV is stricktly supposed to be for people who want to go travelling, I suppose it's reasonable to expect that once the time available for travelling within Thailand has expired, one might wish to go about elsewhere and then return to Thailand before finally flying home?

 

Or maybe the person processing my application was just having a bad/good day ????????‍♂️.

             

                This reply is not particularly directed at you  @JayClay, rather I just wish to dispel a myth promoted by others on here....

                That the METV is "strictly" intended for anything is nothing but supposition on behalf of a few "troubled" members who post mis information  on this site, the same members who had a bee in their bonnet regarding "covid extensions" and who  invented their own imaginary regulations regarding who should and should not be entitled to them, the same members who have even dreamed up their own imaginary definition of what a "real tourist" is

                 The METV replaced the triple entry tourist visa, It effectively allows the same total amount of time to be spent in Thailand , however it does allow the holders of it, more flexibility should they wish to make additional visits to other countries and as such does away with the need to apply for re entry permits

                There are no official conditions regarding the intended use of a  METV other than it allows for multiple entries into Thailand for the "purpose of tourism",  with each entry allowing a stay of 60 days ( each entry can also be extended by 30 days at the discretion of an immigration officer)

                If I remember correctly the METV is also referred to on the e-visa website as suitable for visiting friends and family, for stays of not exceeding 60 days 

                So with a bit of planning an METV can allow almost up to 9 months here with just a couple of border bounces.  

                 The idea that it is only intended for people who wish to travel throughout Asia whilst using Thailand as some sort of "base" is not mentioned on any official immigration  website that I have seen. 

                  Anyway, no need for anybody  to take my word for it , much better informed members such as  "Ubon Joe" (RIP) and "Doctor Jack" have clarified this on several occasions, just search through the threads if looking for confirmation

 

[BritTim]

58 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

                 The idea that it is only intended for people who wish to travel throughout Asia whilst using Thailand as some sort of "base" is not mentioned on any official immigration  website that I have seen. 

The strong preference of most in high places in Thailand is that the METV be used for multiple discrete trips to the country. There are no regulations that enforce this, however and, as you post, it is quite feasible to use an METV for a single extended stay of over eight months. Some immigration officials absolutely hate this, and there have been rare cases of officials at some airports (improperly) actually blocking people from re-entering with an METV as a long stay tourist. 

[Bday Prang]

2 hours ago, BritTim said:

The strong preference of most in high places in Thailand is that the METV be used for multiple discrete trips to the country. There are no regulations that enforce this, however and, as you post, it is quite feasible to use an METV for a single extended stay of over eight months. Some immigration officials absolutely hate this, and there have been rare cases of officials at some airports (improperly) actually blocking people from re-entering with an METV as a long stay tourist. 

           Not only are there no regulations to enforce it , there is absolutely nothing written anywhere to suggest that is the intent!                 I have read the stories on here of, as you say , the extremely rare cases , were some people with valid visas have been denied entry by what  would generally described as "rogue" immigration officers, Most however seemed to involve people with "back to back" single entry tourist visas, and I can't say that I personally remember any cases involving people with METVs.

           Although  I'm well aware you spend a lot more time on here than I do, so I am quite prepared to accept what you are telling me. but, purely out of interest how many cases of people holding METV's actually  being denied entry, specifically as a result of making in / out border bounces, as that is presumably what the officials don't "like",  can you remember?  10, ?  20?  more?

           When you say "the strong preference of most in high places"  who exactly are you referring to? Again I'm not doubting what you say , but If the preferences were that strong , and the people expressing them were of such high stature surely you would have heard of a lot more denials?

           I can't agree that the actions of a small minority of rogue / overzealous officials is representative of immigration policy generally or even indicative of what the guys "at the top table" would prefer, if that was the case they would all be at it, and in my personal experience that has absolutely not been the case

           I also find it a bit strange that the denials of entry take place generally at airports, I mean at least those people have actually been somewhere, maybe those concerned had previous history, overstays for example? Or were they just  victims of some sort of scam in which the airlines were involved. On the spot one way tickets home would not exactly be cheap would they

           All of my in /outs, and there have been plenty of them, took place at  land border crossings, as I'm too lazy and tight fisted to make my way to an airport, and I have never experienced so much as a raised eyebrow, despite the fact that my last passport was the thickness of a telephone directory ! it is however a little worrying. I did at  times consider flying in and out thinking it might appear more "genuine"  glad I never bothered now.

            Now that the ME-non O visas have been resurrected I will probably revert to using those again, but is there any cast iron guarantee that I will be less likely to be denied entry?  probably not I fear.

             It strikes me, that if they don't like the look of you , you aint coming in, whatever visa you have,  except maybe in the case of those with the "elite" visa, were the necessary palms have already been crossed with "silver"

             What's your opinion?

 

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, Bday Prang said:

           Not only are there no regulations to enforce it , there is absolutely nothing written anywhere to suggest that is the intent!                 I have read the stories on here of, as you say , the extremely rare cases , were some people with valid visas have been denied entry by what  would generally described as "rogue" immigration officers, Most however seemed to involve people with "back to back" single entry tourist visas, and I can't say that I personally remember any cases involving people with METVs.

           Although  I'm well aware you spend a lot more time on here than I do, so I am quite prepared to accept what you are telling me. but, purely out of interest how many cases of people holding METV's actually  being denied entry, specifically as a result of making in / out border bounces, as that is presumably what the officials don't "like",  can you remember?  10, ?  20?  more?

           When you say "the strong preference of most in high places"  who exactly are you referring to? Again I'm not doubting what you say , but If the preferences were that strong , and the people expressing them were of such high stature surely you would have heard of a lot more denials?

           I can't agree that the actions of a small minority of rogue / overzealous officials is representative of immigration policy generally or even indicative of what the guys "at the top table" would prefer, if that was the case they would all be at it, and in my personal experience that has absolutely not been the case

           I also find it a bit strange that the denials of entry take place generally at airports, I mean at least those people have actually been somewhere, maybe those concerned had previous history, overstays for example? Or were they just  victims of some sort of scam in which the airlines were involved. On the spot one way tickets home would not exactly be cheap would they

           All of my in /outs, and there have been plenty of them, took place at  land border crossings, as I'm too lazy and tight fisted to make my way to an airport, and I have never experienced so much as a raised eyebrow, despite the fact that my last passport was the thickness of a telephone directory ! it is however a little worrying. I did at  times consider flying in and out thinking it might appear more "genuine"  glad I never bothered now.

            Now that the ME-non O visas have been resurrected I will probably revert to using those again, but is there any cast iron guarantee that I will be less likely to be denied entry?  probably not I fear.

             It strikes me, that if they don't like the look of you , you aint coming in, whatever visa you have,  except maybe in the case of those with the "elite" visa, were the necessary palms have already been crossed with "silver"

             What's your opinion?

 

I think the strongest evidence that the authorities are not keen on long stay tourists is that the Special Tourist visa was only allowed under the special conditions that prevailed during Covid. If people staying nine months as a tourist was considered desirable, they would have continued to allow a nine month stay by receiving extensions at Immigration. You are correct, though, that denying entry to those with visas (single or multiple entry) was not common, and restricted to a few airports plus the land crossing at Aranyaprathet/Poipet. I cannot prove that long stay tourists are more generally disdained.

[JayClay]

13 hours ago, BritTim said:

The strong preference of most in high places in Thailand is that the METV be used for multiple discrete trips to the country

Can you point to anywhere that anybody "in high places" has made such a statement?

[Greenwich Boy]

20 hours ago, BritTim said:

I think the strongest evidence that the authorities are not keen on long stay tourists is that the Special Tourist visa was only allowed under the special conditions that prevailed during Covid. If people staying nine months as a tourist was considered desirable, they would have continued to allow a nine month stay by receiving extensions at Immigration. You are correct, though, that denying entry to those with visas (single or multiple entry) was not common, and restricted to a few airports plus the land crossing at Aranyaprathet/Poipet. I cannot prove that long stay tourists are more generally disdained.

To add and agree with your comment on long term tourists not being overly welcome. I got a Special Tourist Visa in April 2021. Did my first extension in Chiang Mai to be told that the extension was from the day of application not added to the permission to stay stamp. At the time the scheme was due to finish 30 Sept so another hurried extension. An announcement that this visa was to continue was made on 29th Sept so really handy for those of us who like to plan ahead. I did get over 9 months stay in the end but used an agent in the end to take some of the pain a2ay.