Non Immigrant O Visa

[Maestro]

Forget about the old full passport.. Its only confusing matters..

…

I leave Thailand to Singapore (carrying both passports) for an afternoon using my new passport to re enter Thailand and get a 90 day entry. This means that my PP1 has matching exit stamp to go with my 30 day previous entry stamp and PP2 is then used for my re entry (later the same afternoon with the same immigration officials running my name through thier computers as having just left with a different passport number.. No questions asked or eyebrows raised) PP2 now gets entry stamp and 90 days.

LivinLOS, thank you for this additional information. I see things more clearly now.

I can’t disregard PP1 completely for the chronology, as you used it for your departure from Thailand when you flew to Singapore. To complete my picture, I have just two more questions, if you don’t mind:

Which passport did you use to enter Singapore?

Which passport did you use to exit Singapore?

As far as I can see it wouldn’t have mattered either way for your purpose, but your answers will let me modify my list accordingly.

[LivinLOS]

I am told Birmingham and Glasgow operate in a similarly helpful manner.. This was given to me word of mouth and is something I have not checked (I didnt even know there was a Birmingham consulate but was told that there was and they were very friendly, Glasgow was issuing B visa's extreemly easily according to a mate of mine)..

I also note the hint that this is some kind of kickback or that the Consul personally benefits (suits his pocketbook).. My impression is of a Consul who does his best to assist people in his geographical catchment (he will process foriegners visiting the UK if the curcumstances fit) and the Nationality he is supposed to assist. To my mind he is what a public servant should be, a man that applies the rules he is told to enforce and yet interpret them for the applicants benefit if at all possible. I dont want to sound like a brown nose but I fired off all kinds of complex questions to that consul over the months past on rulings, interpretations, etc. Each time I recieved a prompt curteous reply, from someone who appeared actively interested in discussing interpretations and how this effects people.

And I note that despite your grudging acceptance that this has happened there appears to be no change in your belief.. Surely you dont still consider this a situation suitable for "jail, deportation, and blacklisting" ??

[LivinLOS]

Forget about the old full passport.. Its only confusing matters..

…

I leave Thailand to Singapore (carrying both passports) for an afternoon using my new passport to re enter Thailand and get a 90 day entry. This means that my PP1 has matching exit stamp to go with my 30 day previous entry stamp and PP2 is then used for my re entry (later the same afternoon with the same immigration officials running my name through thier computers as having just left with a different passport number.. No questions asked or eyebrows raised) PP2 now gets entry stamp and 90 days.

LivinLOS, thank you for this additional information. I see things more clearly now.

I can’t disregard PP1 completely for the chronology, as you used it for your departure from Thailand when you flew to Singapore. To complete my picture, I have just two more questions, if you don’t mind:

Which passport did you use to enter Singapore?

Which passport did you use to exit Singapore?

As far as I can see it wouldn’t have mattered either way for your purpose, but your answers will let me modify my list accordingly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

At this point I dont think it would legally (or physically) matter.. Changi is a large airport and the staff are making no mental connections with which immediate plane you may or may not have stepped off of by the time you have got to immigration desks..

Personally for neatness sake I used my old PP1 with Thai exit chops to enter and exit Sing and then for the return use my virgin PP2 with nothing in it except the 1 year non imm O in it to re enter Thailand..

I fully expected the new computer system to have some kind of red flag in place for the same face (facial recognician now), same name, same DoB, same everything but different passport number to walk through the immigration out and back within a 5 hour time frame.. However if it did red flag me in any way no one said anything and I understand it is my right to present which ever passport I choose while being a dual passport holder. I am unsure what the facial recognician scans are looking for but they certainly dont seem to be looking for same faces on different passports !!!

[Maestro]

At this point I dont think it would legally (or physically) matter.. Changi is a large airport and the staff are making no mental connections with which immediate plane you may or may not have stepped off of by the time you have got to immigration desks..

Personally for neatness sake I used my old PP1 with Thai exit chops to enter and exit Sing and then for the return use my virgin PP2 with nothing in it except the 1 year non imm O in it to re enter Thailand..

I fully expected the new computer system to have some kind of red flag in place for the same face (facial recognician now), same name, same DoB, same everything but different passport number to walk through the immigration out and back within a 5 hour time frame.. However if it did red flag me in any way no one said anything and I understand it is my right to present which ever passport I choose while being a dual passport holder.  I am unsure what the facial recognician scans are looking for but they certainly dont seem to be looking for same faces on different passports !!!

Thank you, LivinLOS. You realise, of course, that you have made history.

Being allowed by the UK government to be in possession of two valid UK passports at the same time, you had the idea of sending the new, Bangkok-issued passport from Thailand to the UK for a visa, and you had the gumption to actually do it.

What are the risks you took? What is the worst-case scenario of what could have happened?

Worst-case scenario:

Upon your return from Singapore, the Immigration Officer submits your passport to a meticulous examination and notices two unusual things about it (please note that I am careful not to use the words “irregular” or “illegal”):

1. Your passport was issued in Thailand.

2. You had not used this passport to exit Thailand.

The Immigration Officer then refuses you entry. You are prepared for this and show copies of the emails you received from the Thai consulate in the UK confirming the correctness of what you did. The Officer brushes this aside, continues to refuse you entry. (You would be prepared for this and at this point present your old passport and be given a 30-day on arrival stamp. But this being the worst-case scenario, you do not reveal the existence of the old passport)

You are put in the Immigration Department’s detention centre, then brought to court, where you are represented by a lawyer.

Prosecutor: “Your Honour, the defendant attempted to enter the Kingdom with a UK passport issued by the UK embassy in Bangkok but without any Thai exit stamp in the passport. This is an indication of his having left the Kingdom illegally, without presenting his passport to a Thai Immigration Officer.”

Defence lawyer: “Your Honour, my client requested and obtained written confirmation from the Thai consulate in the UK that what he did was not illegal.”

Prosecutor: “Your Honour, contrary to what may be the case in some other countries where everything that is not explicitly forbidden by law or regulation is permitted, in Thailand everything that is not explicitly permitted by law or regulation is forbidden. What the defendant did is not permitted by Thai law or regulation.”

Judge, to defence lawyer: “Do you have anything to show that the defendant’s action is permitted by Thai law or Ministerial Regulation published in the Government Gazette?”

Defence lawyer: “I do not, your Honour.”

End of worst-case scenario

That worst-case scenario is perhaps exaggerated.

Second-to-worst-case scenario

Immigration Officer: “This passport was issued in Thailand and there is no Thai exit stamp. Please give me the passport with which you left Thailand.”

LivinLOS: “The Thai consulate in the UK told me it is legal to use my new passport to enter Thailand. I have here copies of the emails to prove it.”

Immigration Officer: “ I am sorry, sir, but if you cannot give me the passport with which you left Thailand I have to arrest you and put you in the detention centre.”

LivinLos presents old passport.

Immigration Officer puts 30-day on arrival stamp in old passport, returns both passports to LivinLOS.

[/b]End of second-to-worst-case scenario]

Of course, even for the second-to-worst-case scenario to play out that way the Immigration Officer would have to look at your new passport very carefully and he would have to choose to take that attitude of refusing you entry on your new, Bangkok-issued passport without Thai exit stamp. Legal or not, that question would never be put to the test, unless you insisted on being arrested and brought to court.

[wimpy]

At this point I dont think it would legally (or physically) matter.. Changi is a large airport and the staff are making no mental connections with which immediate plane you may or may not have stepped off of by the time you have got to immigration desks..

Personally for neatness sake I used my old PP1 with Thai exit chops to enter and exit Sing and then for the return use my virgin PP2 with nothing in it except the 1 year non imm O in it to re enter Thailand..

I fully expected the new computer system to have some kind of red flag in place for the same face (facial recognician now), same name, same DoB, same everything but different passport number to walk through the immigration out and back within a 5 hour time frame.. However if it did red flag me in any way no one said anything and I understand it is my right to present which ever passport I choose while being a dual passport holder.  I am unsure what the facial recognician scans are looking for but they certainly dont seem to be looking for same faces on different passports !!!

Thank you, LivinLOS. You realise, of course, that you have made history.

Being allowed by the UK government to be in possession of two valid UK passports at the same time, you had the idea of sending the new, Bangkok-issued passport from Thailand to the UK for a visa, and you had the gumption to actually do it.

What are the risks you took? What is the worst-case scenario of what could have happened?

Worst-case scenario:

Upon your return from Singapore, the Immigration Officer submits your passport to a meticulous examination and notices two unusual things about it (please note that I am careful not to use the words “irregular” or “illegal”):

1. Your passport was issued in Thailand.

2. You had not used this passport to exit Thailand.

The Immigration Officer then refuses you entry. You are prepared for this and show copies of the emails you received from the Thai consulate in the UK confirming the correctness of what you did. The Officer brushes this aside, continues to refuse you entry. (You would be prepared for this and at this point present your old passport and be given a 30-day on arrival stamp. But this being the worst-case scenario, you do not reveal the existence of the old passport)

You are put in the Immigration Department’s detention centre, then brought to court, where you are represented by a lawyer.

Prosecutor: “Your Honour, the defendant attempted to enter the Kingdom with a UK passport issued by the UK embassy in Bangkok but without any Thai exit stamp in the passport. This is an indication of his having left the Kingdom illegally, without presenting his passport to a Thai Immigration Officer.”

Defence lawyer: “Your Honour, my client requested and obtained written confirmation from the Thai consulate in the UK that what he did was not illegal.”

Prosecutor: “Your Honour, contrary to what may be the case in some other countries where everything that is not explicitly forbidden by law or regulation is permitted, in Thailand everything that is not explicitly permitted by law or regulation is forbidden. What the defendant did is not permitted by Thai law or regulation.”

Judge, to defence lawyer: “Do you have anything to show that the defendant’s action is permitted by Thai law or Ministerial Regulation published in the Government Gazette?”

Defence lawyer: “I do not, your Honour.”

End of worst-case scenario

That worst-case scenario is perhaps exaggerated.

Second-to-worst-case scenario

Immigration Officer: “This passport was issued in Thailand and there is no Thai exit stamp. Please give me the passport with which you left Thailand.”

LivinLOS: “The Thai consulate in the UK told me it is legal to use my new passport to enter Thailand. I have here copies of the emails to prove it.”

Immigration Officer: “ I am sorry, sir, but if you cannot give me the passport with which you left Thailand I have to arrest you and put you in the detention centre.”

LivinLos presents old passport.

Immigration Officer puts 30-day on arrival stamp in old passport, returns both passports to LivinLOS.

[/b]End of second-to-worst-case scenario]

Of course, even for the second-to-worst-case scenario to play out that way the Immigration Officer would have to look at your new passport very carefully and he would have to choose to take that attitude of refusing you entry on your new, Bangkok-issued passport without Thai exit stamp. Legal or not, that question would never be put to the test, unless you insisted on being arrested and brought to court.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I had a new US passport issued in Thailand,as my old one was close to expiring. The old passport was invalidated by the US consulate. When I left Thailand, they only wanted to exit stamp the old passport, not the new one. I then returned to Thailand with an empty new passport issued in Thailand. No problem at all.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

You didn't have a dud visa in the new passport.

[Axel]

Double- and multi passports is a very complex issue.

@ Maestro: I feel with you, many years ago, my former (Swiss) wife run into the same barrier. Switzerland will issue two p/ports, but one must be deposited. Plain nonsense, as it does not work. In our experience, living in Tokyo at that time the Swiss authorities suggested to deposit at Swiss consulate in HKG. Should than enter Hong Kong on one, exchange and exit on the other. (Does not work, as when leaving HKG you have no entry chop as that p/port is now deposited with the consulate)

I hold two p/ports for the last +34 years, having German nationality. The authorities will issue a second and leave you with both. However, your application must be sponsored by an employer's letter explaining the reasons for needing two p/ports.

Careful here, strictly legal point: You are only allowed to make use of the second 'book', as the Thais say, for the reasons given. If your reasons were frequent travel Israel/Arab countries and you do not go to there, but use for other reasons, that is illegal and the issuing authority can wiithdraw your second p/port for mis-use. (Over the years it happened to one of my colleagues)

Another reason for Germans is the Constitution guaranteeing free travel. Strictly speaking this freedom is only within Germany, however, can be used in border crossing travel.

Visa-issuing: As a basic rule a visa must be obtained in person and the person applying for must be within the jurisdiction of the visa-issuing place, i.e. consulate or consular-section of the embassy. Some, esp. Hon. Consulates, do bend this rule a bit by closing both eyes.

Dr. Pat Pong mentioned monetary reasons, I believe this is absolutely true. I do not know in details how Thailand finances her Hon. Consuls, but assume, they can keep visa-fees to run the office, as my own country does in cases. This means the more visa the Hon. Consul issues the more income there is.

As long as you arrive in LOS with a visa in your passport you will not usually have a problem, although you did obtain the visa in a way that is not really legal, regardless of what the consulate said. The decision to let you enter the country, however, is NOT with the Consul, Honorary or other, but with the Immigration police at their sole descretion following immigration law, not rules by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Hope this clarifies a bit, yes, I have obtained visa by mailing my p/port from abroad (Not recently for Thailand, as I do not need) and yes, I know it is not really legal.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

A very good explanation Axel. Thank you for that.

[LivinLOS]

@ManofHull, finding the inaccuracies and trying to find the best legal way through these legal minefields is what much of the discussion here is attempting. Inaccuracies are bound to exist but hopefully the greater body of experience of multiple people in multiple juristictions points the way forward.

To speak in Dr PP's defense I am sure he is just trying to emphasize the safe option (even though I am not indicating that dual passports are unsafe) and even if he wasnt Dr PP's comments as a user of the site are not reflective on the site as a whole which is an important expat community. I am sure the last thing that the site owners wish to do is antagonize the ministers out there.

Edited November 15, 2005 by LivinLOS

[Freddie_fly]

Agree fully manofhull, I also agree with most of the comments made by livinginLOS, which of course means I find dr_Pat_Pong's naysaying rather tedious as he does not back up his comments with anything other than himself. Unsure of dr_Pat_pong's nationality, US perhaps, I have several workmates from the US who have two US passports.

So WRT two passports I have held two British passports for the previous 16 years. Initially due to working on seismic research vessels and having visa issues. The purpose of the second passport was not due to country stamps (which is a moot point anyway as both Israel and South Africa, at the time, would stamp onto a piece of paper and attach into your passport if you asked them) But due to the fact that getting Visa's was sometimes time consuming and we had to apply early, which meant while we were already offshore working somewhere. This was accepted without comment by the British Passport office, when accompanied by a letter from my company.

So dr_pat_pong says obtaining visa's by mail is "Illegal", whereas the British Embassy clearly disagrees with him as they issued me with a second passport for just that purpose.

I have obtained visa's for Thailand,Brazil,India,Venezuela,Indonesia and Australia by this method over the last 15 years and have never had any problems.

Where dr_Pat_Pong may be confused is with the scam of staying in thailand and "mailing" out your passport through a local company to get stamped back into the country, so it appears you actually left and returned. These were often false stamps and this was quite rightly cracked down on, although in true LOS style I think only the Farangs doing it were in trouble, not the Thai's who assured them it was legit.

Most embassies/consulates have downloadable visa applications and a mailing address in the Consular/visa section of their website, ever wondered why dr_Pat_Pong??

regards

Freddie

(still upset that the Thai consulate in Hull is out in the middle of the countryside now instead of in Spyvie Street downtown)

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Alan Taylor, the Honorary Consul issues visas strictly in accordance with Thai law and the regulations and directions issued by the Thai Ministry of Foreign affairs and the Royal Thai Consulate London. Neither he, nor his staff, make any personal financial gain from the issue of visas.

I suggest you raise the level of further comment to your usual: sarcastic, purile and humourless.

A copy of your comment has been sent by the Consul and to the Minister who hopefully can act against your website.

Furthermore much of what has been written in the thread is inaccurate, as is much of the "informed" opinion expressed in this forum.

You know a lot. The Hon Consul retains 100 per cent of the visa fees. BTW the place in London is the Royal Thai Embassy.

[manofhull]

You know a lot. The Hon Consul retains 100 per cent of the visa fees. BTW the place in London is the Royal Thai Embassy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thankyou for your compliment.

The place in London is the Consular Section of the Royal Thai Embassy. Seperate entrance.

The Consul does not put visa fees into his pocket book as you allege nor does he retain 100% of visa fees. Although the Hull consul is titled "Honorary" he is in fact salaried. Neither he nor his staff are on piece work. So whether he issues 5 or 500 visas in any day neither he nor they profit other than they now enjoy a long overdue modern working environment.

Thai consulates in the UK are intended to be self financing as are British consulates. UK consuls are generally more relaxed over visa issuance because British citizens are statistically more likely to abide by conditions aplicable to their visa than most other nationalities.

The Consul is aware that Hull has an ill deserved reputation for being overly lax. In fact they reject more applications than other consulates.

The consul is aware of this site and although a lot of the advice it contains is inaccurate, a lot is misleading or plain wrong. He holds a disdainful view.

My comments are not written with the authority of the Consul. His attitude is one of disdain for you and sadness that readers of this forum may put trust in your frequently wrong advice.

and contempt .

[george]

I would like to invite the Honorary Consul of Hull to this forum. Maybe he could help us with the rules and regulations.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

How would he find time as the ONLY salaried Honorary Thai Consul in the world

[george]

A few posts in this thread cleaned up, and some inappropriate posts were deleted.

/Admin

[dr_Pat_Pong]

You know a lot. The Hon Consul retains 100 per cent of the visa fees. BTW the place in London is the Royal Thai Embassy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thankyou for your compliment.

The place in London is the Consular Section of the Royal Thai Embassy. Seperate entrance.

The Consul does not put visa fees into his pocket book as you allege nor does he retain 100% of visa fees. Although the Hull consul is titled "Honorary" he is in fact salaried. Neither he nor his staff are on piece work. So whether he issues 5 or 500 visas in any day neither he nor they profit other than they now enjoy a long overdue modern working environment.

Thai consulates in the UK are intended to be self financing as are British consulates. UK consuls are generally more relaxed over visa issuance because British citizens are statistically more likely to abide by conditions aplicable to their visa than most other nationalities.

The Consul is aware that Hull has an ill deserved reputation for being overly lax. In fact they reject more applications than other consulates.

The consul is aware of this site and although a lot of the advice it contains is inaccurate, a lot is misleading or plain wrong. He holds a disdainful view.

My comments are not written with the authority of the Consul. His attitude is one of disdain for you and sadness that readers of this forum may put trust in your frequently wrong advice.

and contempt .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for that Alan

[george]

Thread closed.

/Admin

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Except for the fact that its wrong..

As confirmed by A ) Local immigration B ) the overseas consulate in writing..

What law have you broken in Thailand ???

You may have a problem with the Malaysian authorities for not having your passport with you (get a second passport) butyou would have done nothing wrong in the eyes of the Thai government who will readily accept applications (to some consulates) by mail from people not in the country where the consulate is based.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Post that confirmation from Thai Immigration

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why does a falang living in thailand thinks he knows the the thai law better then the thai goverment representation in the ambassy off amsterdam????????????

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The head of post in Amsterdam has a doctorate in Law too.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

You know a lot. The Hon Consul retains 100 per cent of the visa fees. BTW the place in London is the Royal Thai Embassy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thankyou for your compliment.

The place in London is the Consular Section of the Royal Thai Embassy. Seperate entrance.

The Consul does not put visa fees into his pocket book as you allege nor does he retain 100% of visa fees. Although the Hull consul is titled "Honorary" he is in fact salaried. Neither he nor his staff are on piece work. So whether he issues 5 or 500 visas in any day neither he nor they profit other than they now enjoy a long overdue modern working environment.

Thai consulates in the UK are intended to be self financing as are British consulates. UK consuls are generally more relaxed over visa issuance because British citizens are statistically more likely to abide by conditions aplicable to their visa than most other nationalities.

The Consul is aware that Hull has an ill deserved reputation for being overly lax. In fact they reject more applications than other consulates.

The consul is aware of this site and although a lot of the advice it contains is inaccurate, a lot is misleading or plain wrong. He holds a disdainful view.

My comments are not written with the authority of the Consul. His attitude is one of disdain for you and sadness that readers of this forum may put trust in your frequently wrong advice.

and contempt .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I hold you in contempt to Alan. You well deserve to be called accommodating.