Thai Tourist - Is 3 Months In The Uk A Big Ask ?

[magpie3]

Hi folks,

I've read many of the posts with interest and have found invaluable advice for our Thai friend's visa application.

However, I've heard people I know saying - 'don't ask for 3 months, you'll have problems' and some have suggested that asking for 1 month would be better and just stay longer - have to alter the return date on the ticket.

I'm not inclined to even consider this, but it cast some doubt on the prospects of getting him a visa for 3 months.

I would think it a waste for him to come for any less as he may never be able to afford it again.

Has anyone any experience/advice regarding the above?

Relevant background -

We are retired, can supply financial refs, pay for his trip and expenses, and are 2 bed home owners in the UK. We've known him for 3 years and spent 3 months in Thailand each of those years, much of which in his company.

He is 30 yrs old, will be giving up a job that pays 4500 baht per month but will be returning to his other job which pays 9-10,000 per month when he returns to BKK. And of course looking for another second job!

I think I've got a handle on the rest of the application details thanks to all the insight from the forum.

Just need some feedback on how to handle the 3 month application.

RSVP

[paully]

^ Visitor Visas to the UK are valid for a 6 month stay, as I'm sure you know, even if you've indicated you are only intending to come for 2 weeks.

The problem with stating that your visitor is definitely coming for 3 months, and no less, is that the Entry Clearance Officer may then be a little suspicious about your visitor's return to Thailand. You say that he will return 'to his other job', but does he really have their consent to be away from his post for 3 months and that they are happy to have him back afterwards? The letter of support should certainly state that clearly.

[magpie3]

^ Visitor Visas to the UK are valid for a 6 month stay, as I'm sure you know, even if you've indicated you are only intending to come for 2 weeks.

The problem with stating that your visitor is definitely coming for 3 months, and no less, is that the Entry Clearance Officer may then be a little suspicious about your visitor's return to Thailand. You say that he will return 'to his other job', but does he really have their consent to be away from his post for 3 months and that they are happy to have him back afterwards? The letter of support should certainly state that clearly.

Thanks Paully,

His main 'job' is working at a hotel as a singer and he's been there years - 7 nights a week other than a few odd breaks. He has provided them with a 'stand in'.

He's confident he can get the letter and he's well known and good enough to be wanted back. So I guess he'll just have to make the wording clear, and we'll have to make it clear that we are sending him back!

One of us may be returning at the same time. If so this would probably help.

So I guess I'll get on with the letter of support now and stop worrying.

Thanks again.

Edited July 12, 2008 by magpie3

[Tyke]

^ Visitor Visas to the UK are valid for a 6 month stay, as I'm sure you know, even if you've indicated you are only intending to come for 2 weeks.

The problem with stating that your visitor is definitely coming for 3 months, and no less, is that the Entry Clearance Officer may then be a little suspicious about your visitor's return to Thailand. You say that he will return 'to his other job', but does he really have their consent to be away from his post for 3 months and that they are happy to have him back afterwards? The letter of support should certainly state that clearly.

Thanks Paully,

His main 'job' is working at a hotel as a singer and he's been there years - 7 nights a week other than a few odd breaks. He has provided them with a 'stand in'.

He's confident he can get the letter and he's well known and good enough to be wanted back. So I guess he'll just have to make the wording clear, and we'll have to make it clear that we are sending him back!

One of us may be returning at the same time. If so this would probably help.

So I guess I'll get on with the letter of support now and stop worrying.

Thanks again.

Hi my partner went to UK when i was there - they only gave him 2 weeks. The visa may be valid for 6 months but that does not mean he can stay that long - it means he has to use it within 6 months. The immigration officer on duty will decide how long, not the visa people. Incidentally, we both went to the USA on holiday - he was given 6 months to stay - I, a Brit helping the Americans to lose the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, got a measley 90 days on the waiver program, bloody cheek! Don't the americans realise my strategic importance or wot?

Anyway to get back to the UK situation. Saying u may return with him will not mean anything. He has to stand alone financially ie. should have evidence of his own ability to finance the trip even if you gave him the cash. It is much better for him to have had enough cash in his bank with proof for at least 6 months before he goes to the UK. A credit card is a must - coz supposing he argued with his sponsors and they chucked him outta the arse? He has to prove he is be able to cope on his own financially for travel, food and accommodation for the whole period. Sponsors word don't mean a lot - hard cash and evidence does. He should also be fully covered for medical insurance. Secondly, it would have been much better to get his old or new employers to vouch that he is working for them now and that they have given him leave of absence for the duration of the trip. They are looking for reasons why he should want to return - so a current job, education course, property, family dependents etc all help - but evidence, evidence.

They also look at reasons why he may want to stay in the UK - especially medical reasons, romance, and financial (job, live off sponsors, find casual work as a singer etc) so try to look at those also. My partner has acquired an immensley impressive record of travelling abroad with me and returning to Thailand so can go virtually anywhere now coz of the stamps in the passport - but they had to be earned. BTW don't say he will take English lessons - that requires a student visa I think but check on that.

My partner presents a document of 20 pages or so and things like that work very well - even thought the interviewing officer simply flicked through and said 'so how long have you known this guy?" Bloody cheek, but it works. Good luck - it all takes a lot of work and planning and research but will eventually pay off if u persist even if he fails first time - stick at it.

[Mossfinn]

Hi my partner went to UK when i was there - they only gave him 2 weeks. The visa may be valid for 6 months but that does not mean he can stay that long - it means he has to use it within 6 months. The immigration officer on duty will decide how long, not the visa people. Incidentally, we both went to the USA on holiday - he was given 6 months to stay - I, a Brit helping the Americans to lose the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, got a measley 90 days on the waiver program, bloody cheek! Don't the americans realise my strategic importance or wot?

Are you sure you are talking about Brit Immigration?

If he receives a 6 month visa that is what he gets, not six months to use it, but a six month period of stay, however the complication arises from any information you may have provided on your application, if you stated a two week holiday and receive a six month VV and stay for a period over and above the two week period, but less than the 6 month granted, it may cause problems in any future application.

The immigration officer does not grant the period of time on your visa, but can refuse entry if he has any suspicions.

Iraq and Afghanistan are best left out of this equation in my opinion.

Moss

[mariner29]

Yes my wife was given 6 Months but at the interview which was several years ago the ECO reminded her she will issue a 6 month visa but expects her back in 3 . They finally replied to the email and explained you only asked for 3 so we expect you to return within that period.

[britmaveric]

Look at it from ECO(s) point of view - how many Thai people can afford to take 3 months off work, and still keep same job? (not many I suspect, and I think here lies the problem)

[RAZZELL]

Anyway to get back to the UK situation. Saying u may return with him will not mean anything. He has to stand alone financially ie. should have evidence of his own ability to finance the trip even if you gave him the cash. It is much better for him to have had enough cash in his bank with proof for at least 6 months before he goes to the UK. A credit card is a must - coz supposing he argued with his sponsors and they chucked him outta the arse? He has to prove he is be able to cope on his own financially for travel, food and accommodation for the whole period. Sponsors word don't mean a lot - hard cash and evidence does. He should also be fully covered for medical insurance. Secondly, it would have been much better to get his old or new employers to vouch that he is working for them now and that they have given him leave of absence for the duration of the trip. They are looking for reasons why he should want to return - so a current job, education course, property, family dependents etc all help - but evidence, evidence.

I wouldn't agree with some of this. I know several people who have had no job, income, credit card or assets who got visa's. The onus is on the sponsor to provide evidence of support, accommodation etc.

Obviously it helps if the applicant has a good job, land, house or whatever. But in reality, how many Thai's could afford to come to the UK for several month's and pay for the whole trip themselves?

http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/en/howtoapply/infs/inf3sponsors

RAZZ

[oldtimer]

Anyway to get back to the UK situation. Saying u may return with him will not mean anything. He has to stand alone financially ie. should have evidence of his own ability to finance the trip even if you gave him the cash. It is much better for him to have had enough cash in his bank with proof for at least 6 months before he goes to the UK. A credit card is a must - coz supposing he argued with his sponsors and they chucked him outta the arse? He has to prove he is be able to cope on his own financially for travel, food and accommodation for the whole period. Sponsors word don't mean a lot - hard cash and evidence does. He should also be fully covered for medical insurance. Secondly, it would have been much better to get his old or new employers to vouch that he is working for them now and that they have given him leave of absence for the duration of the trip. They are looking for reasons why he should want to return - so a current job, education course, property, family dependents etc all help - but evidence, evidence.

I wouldn't agree with some of this. I know several people who have had no job, income, credit card or assets who got visa's. The onus is on the sponsor to provide evidence of support, accommodation etc.

Obviously it helps if the applicant has a good job, land, house or whatever. But in reality, how many Thai's could afford to come to the UK for several month's and pay for the whole trip themselves?

http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/en/howtoapply/infs/inf3sponsors

RAZZ

The authorities are simply looking for three things:

1. a valid reason to go to the UK

2. a valid reason to return to Thailand

3. enough money to finance a trip

Going to the UK for 3 months to study English is a valid reason. A letter from your employer stating that you have 3-month's leave for developmental purposes and a job waiting for you is a valid reason to come back. Lots of cash in the bank will help to prove the finance situation while a letter from a guarantor in the UK offering accomodation and willingness to pay for repatriation could help in borderline cases. Good luck

[Mossfinn]

Anyway to get back to the UK situation. Saying u may return with him will not mean anything. He has to stand alone financially ie. should have evidence of his own ability to finance the trip even if you gave him the cash. It is much better for him to have had enough cash in his bank with proof for at least 6 months before he goes to the UK. A credit card is a must - coz supposing he argued with his sponsors and they chucked him outta the arse? He has to prove he is be able to cope on his own financially for travel, food and accommodation for the whole period. Sponsors word don't mean a lot - hard cash and evidence does. He should also be fully covered for medical insurance. Secondly, it would have been much better to get his old or new employers to vouch that he is working for them now and that they have given him leave of absence for the duration of the trip. They are looking for reasons why he should want to return - so a current job, education course, property, family dependents etc all help - but evidence, evidence.

I wouldn't agree with some of this. I know several people who have had no job, income, credit card or assets who got visa's. The onus is on the sponsor to provide evidence of support, accommodation etc.

Obviously it helps if the applicant has a good job, land, house or whatever. But in reality, how many Thai's could afford to come to the UK for several month's and pay for the whole trip themselves?

http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/en/howtoapply/infs/inf3sponsors

RAZZ

You are quite right Razz, I think Tyke has his wires crossed a little bit.

Moss

[Tyke]

Anyway to get back to the UK situation. Saying u may return with him will not mean anything. He has to stand alone financially ie. should have evidence of his own ability to finance the trip even if you gave him the cash. It is much better for him to have had enough cash in his bank with proof for at least 6 months before he goes to the UK. A credit card is a must - coz supposing he argued with his sponsors and they chucked him outta the arse? He has to prove he is be able to cope on his own financially for travel, food and accommodation for the whole period. Sponsors word don't mean a lot - hard cash and evidence does. He should also be fully covered for medical insurance. Secondly, it would have been much better to get his old or new employers to vouch that he is working for them now and that they have given him leave of absence for the duration of the trip. They are looking for reasons why he should want to return - so a current job, education course, property, family dependents etc all help - but evidence, evidence.

I wouldn't agree with some of this. I know several people who have had no job, income, credit card or assets who got visa's. The onus is on the sponsor to provide evidence of support, accommodation etc.

Obviously it helps if the applicant has a good job, land, house or whatever. But in reality, how many Thai's could afford to come to the UK for several month's and pay for the whole trip themselves?

http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/en/howtoapply/infs/inf3sponsors

RAZZ

You are quite right Razz, I think Tyke has his wires crossed a little bit.

Moss

Ok, criticisms accepted, including the jokes about Iran and Afghanistan - yeah tongue in cheek (maybe I should have indicated that for the less well aware).

But I am only advising on what has worked successfully for my partner. Only once has he had a visa turned down - it was for the UK when he applied first time and we were rather ignorant and didn't prepare very well. Since then he has been successful every time - including, UK (twice), USA, Schengen, and a myriad of asian countries which may not count here. We prepare (overprepare maybe but so what?) very carefully and leave nothing to chance. Of course it is possible to get visa without some of the preparations but the chances of getting a visa then decline considerably. This is from personal experience, not from third party info or 'friends of friends'. Take it all as you like.

[Tyke]

Going to the UK for 3 months to study English is a valid reason. A letter from your employer stating that you have 3-month's leave for developmental purposes and a job waiting for you is a valid reason to come back. Lots of cash in the bank will help to prove the finance situation while a letter from a guarantor in the UK offering accomodation and willingness to pay for repatriation could help in borderline cases. Good luck

http://www.excel-english.com

I agree but what I was saying is that if you are applying for a tourist visa, don't say in the interview or application that you are then intending or maybe intending to also take English lessons as that may be a change of purpose and may need a student visa but I am not clear on that point. Of course one can apply to study English from the outset, which is different. If so, one question that crops up is 'why go to the UK to study English for 3 months - why not study it in BKK? That's what happened in my partner's case. I could go on.....

[Mossfinn]

yeah tongue in cheek (maybe I should have indicated that for the less well aware).

O.K, it just didn't sound to tongue in cheek to me and these comments can kick off on occasion and it totally disintegrates the thread, thanks for the explanation.

Moss

[Mossfinn]

one question that crops up is 'why go to the UK to study English for 3 months - why not study it in BKK?

Because you can immerse yourself in the culture and have consistent and continual contact with English, just walking along a street can give you powerful integration to everyday English language. Just one thought.

I agree but what I was saying is that if you are applying for a tourist visa, don't say in the interview or application that you are then intending or maybe intending to also take English lessons as that may be a change of purpose

I would suggest this is good advice.

Moss

[RAZZELL]

one question that crops up is 'why go to the UK to study English for 3 months - why not study it in BKK?

Because you can immerse yourself in the culture and have consistent and continual contact with English, just walking along a street can give you powerful integration to everyday English language. Just one thought.

I agree but what I was saying is that if you are applying for a tourist visa, don't say in the interview or application that you are then intending or maybe intending to also take English lessons as that may be a change of purpose

I would suggest this is good advice.

Moss

Exactly. You are not allowed to study or work on a visit visa.

It is for a "visit" ...or in old-fashioned English, a holiday

RAZZ

[paully]

Look at it from ECO(s) point of view - how many Thai people can afford to take 3 months off work, and still keep same job? (not many I suspect, and I think here lies the problem)

Precisely: to quote from Big Spuds' sister-in-law's refusal letter (quoted from his separate thread):

3."It is not credible that someone genuinely committed to his/her business to take such a substantial period of abscence from it."

It's not a matter of how much money the sponsor has or how good his job is, but how likely the applicant is to return to Thailand afterwards - it's a visitors' visa, after all. If you claim that your employer will easily let you have 3 months off for an overseas visit, is this credible?

Edited July 14, 2008 by paully

[Tyke]

Look at it from ECO(s) point of view - how many Thai people can afford to take 3 months off work, and still keep same job? (not many I suspect, and I think here lies the problem)

Precisely: to quote from Big Spuds' sister-in-law's refusal letter (quoted from his separate thread):

3."It is not credible that someone genuinely committed to his/her business to take such a substantial period of abscence from it."

It's not a matter of how much money the sponsor has or how good his job is, but how likely the applicant is to return to Thailand afterwards - it's a visitors' visa, after all. If you claim that your employer will easily let you have 3 months off for an overseas visit, is this credible?

If the applicant gets an official letter from the employer stating excatly that, then it is credible. Just saying so isn't credible, perhaps.

[paully]

^ Yes - it's about making it look credible.

[the scouser]

However, even with a letter from an employer, it is common for the ECO to contend that s/he does not accept that three months leave would be given, so even though the job may be genuine, s/he does not accept that it will be there on the applicant's proposed return.

Scouse.