After 7 Times No Further Tr Visa In Vientiane/laos

[Brunus]

Fair enough, just trying to decide what the facts are. One place it was described that the guy got angry and moved, another place it was described as he suddenly had to move and start a new life in another country as though he had no choice. Your last post was a better description of the situation.

The point is, a number of people have mentioned receiving a red stamp, there is a long discussion about that. But, very few were denied a visa as in this OP'S case. But, I don't recall anyone being denied a visa at another location, so that they couldn't continue to stay or visit. If one choses not to apply somewhere else, that's their choice.

Sorry if I lost my temper. Maybe I wasn't clear. I am not an English native speaker. I forgot to add that my friend asked immigration in Bkk the best solution for his visa problem and they told him that he could get a tourist visa as many times as he wanted. Same in Vientiane. They saw him as a tourist. Now they don't see him this way anymore (which is fair) but they forget to inform about this change of policy on the immigration website or at the embassy. That's why he got angry. Obviously as you said he could have applied somewhere else, but decided to make things easier for him.

So sorry again if I was rude. Hope no bad feelings.

[Brunus]

Say what you want, if your getting red stamps or being told to get the proper visa, your obviously doing something wrong. It's not so important that you don't think it's wrong, your not the guy handing out the visa.

I don't see why you don't sort yourself out, and get the correct visa, even if it means abit of expense in the short term. All the back and forward over the border must be stressful, if nothing else.

I read all this cr@p about how draconian the visa law is here, try take you LEGALLY married wife back to the UK and experience some real work to get a visa.

If you read my post you can see that the proper authorities (immigration and Vientiane embassy) told him to do so. So my friend thought he had the proper visa for his situation. They forgot to notify that the policy had changed.

"I read all this cr@p about how draconian the visa law is here, try take you LEGALLY married wife back to the UK and experience some real work to get a visa."

If this is referred to me, I am not from the UK, not a native English speaker and I don't really understand what you want to say.

[kingdombiz]

remember farlangs, we are guests of Thailand. no one is above the law. would your country allow tourists/visitors to behave like you? let not abuse the system but respect the law. the fact is most countries welcome high yield tourists/vistors. Hence THB 800K for retirement visa, price of a new saloon car.

[beechguy]

Fair enough, just trying to decide what the facts are. One place it was described that the guy got angry and moved, another place it was described as he suddenly had to move and start a new life in another country as though he had no choice. Your last post was a better description of the situation.

The point is, a number of people have mentioned receiving a red stamp, there is a long discussion about that. But, very few were denied a visa as in this OP'S case. But, I don't recall anyone being denied a visa at another location, so that they couldn't continue to stay or visit. If one choses not to apply somewhere else, that's their choice.

Sorry if I lost my temper. Maybe I wasn't clear. I am not an English native speaker. I forgot to add that my friend asked immigration in Bkk the best solution for his visa problem and they told him that he could get a tourist visa as many times as he wanted. Same in Vientiane. They saw him as a tourist. Now they don't see him this way anymore (which is fair) but they forget to inform about this change of policy on the immigration website or at the embassy. That's why he got angry. Obviously as you said he could have applied somewhere else, but decided to make things easier for him.

So sorry again if I was rude. Hope no bad feelings.

No need to apologize, and certainly no bad feelings from me. I think you just did not understand some of my comments and why asked some of my questions. Anyway, as I said before, I think there are things to learn from these conversations and about other peoples situations. I wish you and your friend the best of luck. I understand your friends frustration, but I think he could have found other solutions.

[Brunus]

No need to apologize, and certainly no bad feelings from me. I think you just did not understand some of my comments and why asked some of my questions. Anyway, as I said before, I think there are things to learn from these conversations and about other peoples situations. I wish you and your friend the best of luck. I understand your friends frustration, but I think he could have found other solutions.

Good to know you don't have bad feelings. I agree these conversations might teach something. I think I misunderstood you. My friend seems happy in Penang.

[phil2]

I said he moved to Penang. He lives there now. He was so pissed by Thai immigration rules that he decided to go and spend his money in Malaysia.

This is an attitude I don't understand. Thailand, as well as every other country on the face of the planet, has a right to determine its own policies for granting the privilege of entry into their country. It is not our personal playground. For the vast majority of us, Thailand's policies are much softer than those of the countries we come from. And this idea that any one of us makes a significant impact on the Thai economy is laughable.

I don't understand what you don't understand. He was fed up with Thai immigration rules and moved to another country, where they don't make life so complicated to tourists. He didn't start a rally vs immigration policies.

"Thailand's policies are much softer than those of the countries we come from." I am married. My wife has no problem to live in my country, has all benefits as me (free medical care, pension when old.........) and soon she will have my citizenship together with her Thai citizenship. I am struggling to gather 400k. What are you talking about?

You don't have to gather 400k. I just did my 5th extension. I actually can't post here, and if you sort it out, don't post it here either. You can PM me if you want.

[tim73]

Just fly out of country, you get 30 days that way (visa on arrival). You need to have outbound ticket (within next 30 days) to get one. So one outbound, one inbound and then one unused outbound ticket 29-30 days from coming in.

One possible airline:

www.laos-airlines.com

[tropo]

glad to know that you have left Thailand, thank you. Thailand does not need people like you to stay long term. Can tourists behave like you to live in your country? Every country in the world welcome high yield visitors not otherwise. Thailand certainly is not beggars' heaven. She has enough of poor citizens and refugees living at home. The least they want is to accept more poor farlangs come to live in Thailand. Sorry the truth hurts.

Having you been living in Thailand for so long that you feel it's your own country now? Let Thailand make her own decisions and stop speaking for her...she doesn't need your help....and find something better to do with your spare time.

[jazzbo]

Re: Silly Rules ... As the esteemed Kuhn Peace Blondie once wrote following my describing tribulations in assisting a Thai NGO Under Royal Patronage:

Let Thais help Thais. Their kingdom,

their laws

, their citizens.

Edited January 3, 2010 by jazzbo

[phetaroi]

Thailand does not have to implement policies that are xenophobic.

It could implement foreigner friendly policies like Cambodia or the Philippines, for example.

That is my point that the defenders of these crazy policies do not seem to get.

Thailand decided to do what it has done.........It has not always been this way....in the past the rules were far more foreigner friendly.

Not all countries make these types of distinctions between short stay tourists and long stay tourists, etc.

It is just a word: TOURISTS. From one perspective, we are all temporary tourists--no matter what our visa status--given the insecurity of the visa system.

Not all countries do what they can to tear marriages apart by constantly raising the income bar.

Not all countries implement silly rules that make you travel across the country just to get a re-entry permit.

Not all countries make you pay for a outbound airline ticket before allowing you to enter the country.

Not all countries do everything in their power to prevent foreigners from staying and spending money in the country.

Etc., etc., etc.

Here again, I don't think the policies are xenophobic. If they were truly xenophobic they could simply say no "x-type" of visa at all. They don't have to allow any type of visa, other than perhaps diplomatic. In reality, while not being an "open door" policy, there seem to be lots of ways to get a visa, which I think leads to a question I've never seen asked on this forum (although probably it has been) -- at what point (perhaps percentage of population) are enough foreigners in a country...enough?

We focus in this forum on Thailand, of course. As a point of comparison, I'd like to know what countries are easier, and what countries are more difficult to get a variety of visas for. I'll start if off by pointing out that it is far more difficult for a Thai to get a visa to America, than it is for an America to get a visa to Thailand.

I don't agree that being a tourist and being an overseas resident is the same thing.

I don't agree that Thailand's intent is to tear apart marriages, since they don't have to allow such marriages to begin with. And they certainly don't do "everything in their power to prevent foreigners from staying and spending money in the country", because if they did this forum would not exist. With all due respect to your overall position, and I do think you have some valid points, I think there's a bit of hyperbole here.

I'm not saying it's all convenient. I wish I didn't have to do 90 day reports. I wish I could have a permanent residency. There are a ton of things I wish. I think we from the west are awfully used to "convenience", and I don't find the third world convenient. That's the challenge, and sometimes the beauty, of living in it.

[Brunus]

Phetaroi

I think I have been rude with you before and I apologize

"I don't agree that being a tourist and being an overseas resident is the same thing." I agree with you. But as I pointed out before my friend was told but the competent authorities that it was ok. Then they changed their mind without informing. I understand this is not Europe but I hope you understand my friend's frustration.

"I don't agree that Thailand's intent is to tear apart marriages, since they don't have to allow such marriages to begin with." I don't understand your point. Can you please clarify?

[hullupullo]

The point is, a number of people have mentioned receiving a red stamp, there is a long discussion about that. But, very few were denied a visa as in this OP'S case. But, I don't recall anyone being denied a visa at another location, so that they couldn't continue to stay or visit. If one choses not to apply somewhere else, that's their choice.

I think it shoud be easy to understand that tourist-visas are for tourists only.

Everybody likes to stay longer can/shoud apply for a adequate visa.!? And there are a lot of possibilitys as mentioned in other parts of the forum.

Happy New Year

Ok, what visa should apply? Under 50y, not married thai or no have friends to visit, not want to go school, not want to start business, not want to invest money. Just want to be tourist all year long because can affort that kind of living.

[beechguy]

The point is, a number of people have mentioned receiving a red stamp, there is a long discussion about that. But, very few were denied a visa as in this OP'S case. But, I don't recall anyone being denied a visa at another location, so that they couldn't continue to stay or visit. If one choses not to apply somewhere else, that's their choice.

I think it shoud be easy to understand that tourist-visas are for tourists only.

Everybody likes to stay longer can/shoud apply for a adequate visa.!? And there are a lot of possibilitys as mentioned in other parts of the forum.

Happy New Year

Ok, what visa should apply? Under 50y, not married thai or no have friends to visit, not want to go school, not want to start business, not want to invest money. Just want to be tourist all year long because can affort that kind of living.

You should apply for a Tourist Visa and use them as long as some consulate will issue them. It's usually easy to get a double or triple entry in one's home country before coming to Thailand, then get additional visas in the region. The consulate being discussed here is Vietiane, if they refuse, there other consulates in the region.

But, also people complain that they want to stay, but have no choice. As you mentioned there are several options, many just choose not to use them. I would say that's fine, but no need to complain.

Edited January 4, 2010 by beechguy

[phetaroi]

Phetaroi

I think I have been rude with you before and I apologize

"I don't agree that being a tourist and being an overseas resident is the same thing." I agree with you. But as I pointed out before my friend was told but the competent authorities that it was ok. Then they changed their mind without informing. I understand this is not Europe but I hope you understand my friend's frustration.

"I don't agree that Thailand's intent is to tear apart marriages, since they don't have to allow such marriages to begin with." I don't understand your point. Can you please clarify?

Second point first. JR said, "Not all countries do what they can to tear marriages apart by constantly raising the income bar." JR is saying that Thai government officials have decided they want to tear farang/Thai marriages apart, so they raise the income required to get a certain kind of visa here. No. Their intent is to bring more money into the country through having a higher income farang be here. That sometimes has the effect of tearing a marriage apart. My point was that if what they wanted was to end Thai/farang marriages, they could simply stop allowing them. Where JR would have been justified would have been if he said there should be a grandfather clause about income level when you initially come into the country.

You and I actually agree (I think) on your first point. Not knowing how the law is going to work is very frustrating. Trying to aim for the bulls-eye when the bulls-eye is constantly moved around isn't very comforting. On the other hand, I have seen a number of people in the forum who have complained when the Thai law is followed to the letter.

BTW, no need for an apology. It's just life on a forum.

[phetaroi]

Ok, what visa should apply? Under 50y, not married thai or no have friends to visit, not want to go school, not want to start business, not want to invest money. Just want to be tourist all year long because can affort that kind of living.

Well, based on the law at face value...none.

[Brunus]

Second point first. JR said, "Not all countries do what they can to tear marriages apart by constantly raising the income bar." JR is saying that Thai government officials have decided they want to tear farang/Thai marriages apart, so they raise the income required to get a certain kind of visa here. No. Their intent is to bring more money into the country through having a higher income farang be here. That sometimes has the effect of tearing a marriage apart. My point was that if what they wanted was to end Thai/farang marriages, they could simply stop allowing them. Where JR would have been justified would have been if he said there should be a grandfather clause about income level when you initially come into the country.

"My point was that if what they wanted was to end Thai/farang marriages, they could simply stop allowing them."

This is incorrect. Thailand voted for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 16

1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
   
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
   
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
   

They can't stop allowing Thais to get married with foreigners. But maybe they could, considering that point 3 seems to be ignored. You said "That sometimes has the effect of tearing a marriage apart". This is clearly against point 3. No protection by society and State.

[beechguy]

I will disagree about the marriages being torn apart, and as usual, JR seems to ignore the facts with some of his other comments. One does not have to have a large amount of money or income to obtain a visa if they are married to a Thai. The 400,000 Baht or 40,000 Baht per month income qualification, only applies to applications for one year "Extensions of Stay". It takes very little, if any money at all, depending on location, to obtain a one year Non-immigrant "O" visa.

Using those, one would be able to stay 15 months, just briefly exiting the country every 90 days for a new permission to stay. That may not be the most convenient method, but certainly no reason to split up a family.

Edited January 4, 2010 by beechguy

[tropo]

I will disagree about the marriages being torn apart, and as usual, JR seems to ignore the facts with some of his other comments. One does not have to have a large amount of money or income to obtain a visa if they are married to a Thai. The 400,000 Baht or 40,000 Baht per month income qualification, only applies to applications for one year "Extensions of Stay". It takes very little, if any money at all, depending on location, to obtain a one year Non-immigrant "O" visa.

Using those, one would be able to stay 15 months, just briefly exiting the country every 90 days for a new permission to stay.

Using a near neighbor as an example, the Philippines: If you marry a Filipino you automatically get a 1 year balikbayan visa. No costs, No visa runs, no reporting, no means testing or income assessment. Even if you ended up penniless, you can stay with your family.

Now that's how a country which truly respects the family unit treats married couples.

Compared to that, Thailand IS tearing married couples apart. I can't understand why people even bother getting married in Thailand. When I first learned how they treated married couples in Thailand I was horrified.

[Brunus]

Compared to that, Thailand IS tearing married couples apart. I can't understand why people even bother getting married in Thailand. When I first learned how they treated married couples in Thailand I was horrified.

I and my wife love each other. That's why we got married. But I agree that married couples should be helped more, even in case the husband has no money at all.

[tropo]

Compared to that, Thailand IS tearing married couples apart. I can't understand why people even bother getting married in Thailand. When I first learned how they treated married couples in Thailand I was horrified.

I and my wife love each other. That's why we got married. But I agree that married couples should be helped more, even in case the husband has no money at all.

I'll give you props for being positive. Right now they don't help you at all so at least there's plenty of room for improvement.

[Brunus]

Compared to that, Thailand IS tearing married couples apart. I can't understand why people even bother getting married in Thailand. When I first learned how they treated married couples in Thailand I was horrified.

I and my wife love each other. That's why we got married. But I agree that married couples should be helped more, even in case the husband has no money at all.

I'll give you props for being positive. Right now they don't help you at all so at least there's plenty of room for improvement.

Hopefully

[tim73]

It is ironic that Thailand has these rather 1st world style immigration laws. Asking visa applicants to jump when they say to jump. Westerners usually earn at least ten times of average Thai salary. It is not like you get big fat check from Thai government every month for your dirty rotten ways of living, you bad bad farang

It is even more ironic if they do this because of fear of those bad farangs buying everything, everybody and their daughters on sight with cash. Well, Chinese already did that long ago! Long before Yanks fell in love with Thai girls after WWII or Vietnam:) Chinese basically own every major business in Thailand. They run this place behind the curtains.

[beechguy]

I will disagree about the marriages being torn apart, and as usual, JR seems to ignore the facts with some of his other comments. One does not have to have a large amount of money or income to obtain a visa if they are married to a Thai. The 400,000 Baht or 40,000 Baht per month income qualification, only applies to applications for one year "Extensions of Stay". It takes very little, if any money at all, depending on location, to obtain a one year Non-immigrant "O" visa.

Using those, one would be able to stay 15 months, just briefly exiting the country every 90 days for a new permission to stay.

Using a near neighbor as an example, the Philippines: If you marry a Filipino you automatically get a 1 year balikbayan visa. No costs, No visa runs, no reporting, no means testing or income assessment. Even if you ended up penniless, you can stay with your family.

Now that's how a country which truly respects the family unit treats married couples.

Compared to that, Thailand IS tearing married couples apart. I can't understand why people even bother getting married in Thailand. When I first learned how they treated married couples in Thailand I was horrified.

I suppose it's a matter of perspective. There are those of us that find it difficult or even impossible to get a visa for our wives or girlfriends to come to our home countries. So I don't Thailand is so bad. And for others here, I realize finances and other things can be a concern. But if they can't afford a bus ticket every 90 days, or to pay for a visa, they are already facing more difficult problems than a visa issue.

Edited January 4, 2010 by beechguy

[phetaroi]

Second point first. JR said, "Not all countries do what they can to tear marriages apart by constantly raising the income bar." JR is saying that Thai government officials have decided they want to tear farang/Thai marriages apart, so they raise the income required to get a certain kind of visa here. No. Their intent is to bring more money into the country through having a higher income farang be here. That sometimes has the effect of tearing a marriage apart. My point was that if what they wanted was to end Thai/farang marriages, they could simply stop allowing them. Where JR would have been justified would have been if he said there should be a grandfather clause about income level when you initially come into the country.

"My point was that if what they wanted was to end Thai/farang marriages, they could simply stop allowing them."

This is incorrect. Thailand voted for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 16

1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
   
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
   
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
   

They can't stop allowing Thais to get married with foreigners. But maybe they could, considering that point 3 seems to be ignored. You said "That sometimes has the effect of tearing a marriage apart". This is clearly against point 3. No protection by society and State.

I think you'll find that the document in question is an international guideline which is not legally binding and is not actually a treaty. However, you have made an excellent point.

Is it your contention that every nation that signed it has fulfilled it 100%?

[tropo]

I suppose it's a matter of perspective. There are those of us that find it difficult or even impossible to get a visa for our wives or girlfriends to come to our home countries. So I don't Thailand is so bad. And for others here, I realize finances and other things can be a concern. But if they can't afford a bus ticket every 90 days, or to pay for a visa, they are already facing more difficult problems than a visa issue.

It's not a matter of perspective at all. It's a direct comparison between the policies of two SE Asian countries. Countries where a huge number of expats choose to live and marry.

[beechguy]

I suppose it's a matter of perspective. There are those of us that find it difficult or even impossible to get a visa for our wives or girlfriends to come to our home countries. So I don't Thailand is so bad. And for others here, I realize finances and other things can be a concern. But if they can't afford a bus ticket every 90 days, or to pay for a visa, they are already facing more difficult problems than a visa issue.

It's not a matter of perspective at all. It's a direct comparison between the policies of two SE Asian countries. Countries where a huge number of expats choose to live and marry.

I meant in perspective in the overall situation of deciding where to live, not in regards to your post. And there are certainly some other alernatives for some people if they decide they don't like Thailand. But, free visas aren't enough of an enticement for me, and apparently many others to chose the PI.

[Brunus]

There are those of us that find it difficult or even impossible to get a visa for our wives or girlfriends to come to our home countries. So I don't Thailand is so bad. And for others here, I realize finances and other things can be a concern. But if they can't afford a bus ticket every 90 days, or to pay for a visa, they are already facing more difficult problems than a visa issue.

I could agree it could be difficult for gf sometimes. But I don't agree it's difficult to get a visa for your wife. At least in Europe. Please give me some examples.

I agree with you that people who can't afford a bus ticket every 90 days, or to pay for a visa have big problems. One more reason for the State to help the family.

[Brunus]

I think you'll find that the document in question is an international guideline which is not legally binding and is not actually a treaty. However, you have made an excellent point.

Is it your contention that every nation that signed it has fulfilled it 100%?

While not a treaty itself, the Declaration was explicitly adopted for the purpose of defining the meaning of the words "fundamental freedoms" and "human rights" appearing in the United Nations Charter, which is binding on all member states. For this reason, the Universal Declaration is a fundamental constitutive document of the United Nations. Many^{[citation needed]} international lawyers, in addition, believe that the Declaration forms part of customary international law and is a powerful tool in applying diplomatic and moral pressure to governments that violate any of its articles. The 1968 United Nations International Conference on Human Rights advised that it "constitutes an obligation for the members of the international community" to all persons. The declaration has served as the foundation for two binding UN human rights covenants, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the principles of the Declaration are elaborated in international treaties such as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the International Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the United Nations Convention Against Torture and many more. The Declaration continues to be widely cited by governments, academics, advocates and constitutional courts and individual human beings who appeal to its principles for the protection of their recognised human rights.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Human_Rights

Myanmar (or Burma the name they had at the time they voted for it) doesn't respect it. But everybody knows they don't respect human rights, and there are international pressures. Afghanistan voted for it and we know the story.....

I am not aware of the situation in other countries. I can say that my country didn't vote for it but it respects it more than Thailand does.

[beechguy]

Hi Brunus, the U.S. for one can be a struggle. But, seems others have trouble with their other respective countries. Have a look in the other forum section sometime for people trying to get visas for their wives and girlfriends, it's not always easy.

As to Tropo's comments, he was making a more valid comparison between one S.E. Asian country with another, versus a western country. Sure I think it would be great if Thailand would make some changes to make it easier, I just don't find it very difficult or unreasonable as it is. And before, when I said perspective, I suppose I shoud have said MY perspective. I've lived and worked in a number of foriegn countries the past 12 years,

Edited January 4, 2010 by beechguy

[Brunus]

Hi Brunus, the U.S. for one can be a struggle. But, seems others have trouble with their other respective countries. Have a look in the other forum section sometime for people trying to get visas for their wives and girlfriends, it's not always easy.

Please don't mix girlfriends and wifes. It's a different situation.

I am not aware of the US situation. What kind of trouble? Arrogant people at the embassy? Many proves requested that the marriage is a real one? Or do the US ask the foreigner spouse to have a certain amount of money? In Europe for sure the first 2 can happen. The last one no.